chillitt wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 1:20 pm
I have no problem whatsoever with someone not wanting a vaccine for a reason. The only ones Ive seen so far are 'Dont wanna' and 'Cant be arsed' (and Greenies weird word soup) If thats the best reason, then it may be better for all concerned to not go bragging about that. If there are good reasons then spread the word.
You want reasons? How about:
Because the government is telling us it's safe.
The government that justified the second lockdown using outdated statistics because the up-to-date statistics didn't support a lockdown.
The government that told us the first lockdown was to flatten the curve and save the NHS.
The government that tells us they didn't cut any corners to get the Pfizer vaccine approved. Except they did away with some of the "red tape" or, in other words, they relaxed some of the regulations which in other circumstances they would argue are there to protect us. I.e. they cut some corners.
chillitt wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 1:50 pm
Yeah, thats what I said.
Oh I thought you said people should really have a sensible reason not to have it.
I obviously read it wrong.
To be clear, if anyone has found a sensible reason to dodge it, they should speak up, if they havent, maybe it would be better if they didnt even bother trying to defend a non reason and just kept it to themselves. Purely in the interests of peace and harmony on here. thats not to say I want to censor people talking about this or anything, just that things seem to run smoother while people arent posting utter tripe and getting arsey when they are pulled up on it.
Saga Lout wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 2:55 pm
The government that tells us they didn't cut any corners to get the Pfizer vaccine approved. Except they did away with some of the "red tape" or, in other words, they relaxed some of the regulations which in other circumstances they would argue are there to protect us. I.e. they cut some corners.
"The head of the MHRA, Dr June Raine, said that - despite the speed of approval - no corners have been cut."
Which is pretty much from the horses mouth, as they are the regulators. Which interpretation are you referring to?
chillitt wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 1:50 pm
Yeah, thats what I said.
Oh I thought you said people should really have a sensible reason not to have it.
I obviously read it wrong.
To be clear, if anyone has found a sensible reason to dodge it, they should speak up, if they havent, maybe it would be better if they didnt even bother trying to defend a non reason and just kept it to themselves. Purely in the interests of peace and harmony on here. thats not to say I want to censor people talking about this or anything, just that things seem to run smoother while people arent posting utter tripe and getting arsey when they are pulled up on it.
Fine as long as this goes for both anti and pro vaxxers.
Oh I thought you said people should really have a sensible reason not to have it.
I obviously read it wrong.
To be clear, if anyone has found a sensible reason to dodge it, they should speak up, if they havent, maybe it would be better if they didnt even bother trying to defend a non reason and just kept it to themselves. Purely in the interests of peace and harmony on here. thats not to say I want to censor people talking about this or anything, just that things seem to run smoother while people arent posting utter tripe and getting arsey when they are pulled up on it.
Fine as long as this goes for both anti and pro vaxxers.
I think I have been pretty clear, on this issue and many others in the past, if you post horseshit, but complain if you get pulled up for it. any side of the argument. To be honest, you can do what you like, I'm going to go and find something else to do for a bit , Lifes too short for this
chillitt wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 1:20 pm
I have no problem whatsoever with someone not wanting a vaccine for a reason. The only ones Ive seen so far are 'Dont wanna' and 'Cant be arsed' (and Greenies weird word soup) If thats the best reason, then it may be better for all concerned to not go bragging about that. If there are good reasons then spread the word.
You want reasons? How about:
Because the government is telling us it's safe.
The government that justified the second lockdown using outdated statistics because the up-to-date statistics didn't support a lockdown.
The government that told us the first lockdown was to flatten the curve and save the NHS.
The government that tells us they didn't cut any corners to get the Pfizer vaccine approved. Except they did away with some of the "red tape" or, in other words, they relaxed some of the regulations which in other circumstances they would argue are there to protect us. I.e. they cut some corners.
Horse wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 9:28 am
And, Harry, weren't you the one who kept banging on about 'being positive', wanting good news and not throwing insults?
If you think the majority of the public are being fooled, then set out a case. Explain what you think is going to happen, why it is wrong and what the better alternative would be.
Otherwise we will be on the slope towards the thread being locked. And it would be flocking stupid to continue that way.
As usual you've entirely missed my point - and you seem especially desperate to create some sort of argument.
...
My comment about sheep was because I think the anti-something mouth breathers are going to be out looking for people to beat up, it used to be black people, then it was queers, then statues to do with slavery and now it might be non-vaccine taking people.
Nope, nothing to do with whether you choose to accept it or not. You had stated your views at the start of the post.
Thank you for explaining the 'sheep' comment. You have clarified that it's just the 'anti-' brigade. It read, to me, differently, as if you felt that the majority (or herd) were being directed, like sheep, to a particular view or implementation of vaccination by restriction of freedom.
And as for me starting an argument, I don't think there's anything wrong with suggesting we keep comments polite and positive, is there? We've already had "it's the re-incarnation of Hitler, no wonder you ... " thrown in.
chillitt wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 3:04 pm
To be clear, if anyone has found a sensible reason to dodge it, they should speak up, if they havent, maybe it would be better if they didnt even bother trying to defend a non reason and just kept it to themselves. Purely in the interests of peace and harmony on here. thats not to say I want to censor people talking about this or anything, just that things seem to run smoother while people arent posting utter tripe and getting arsey when they are pulled up on it.
I'll just decide to have it or not, and I won't share the reason why with you, because I don't have to.
Only one of us is going to get arsey with that scenario and it isn't me
Saga Lout wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 2:55 pm
The government that tells us they didn't cut any corners to get the Pfizer vaccine approved. Except they did away with some of the "red tape" or, in other words, they relaxed some of the regulations which in other circumstances they would argue are there to protect us. I.e. they cut some corners.
"The head of the MHRA, Dr June Raine, said that - despite the speed of approval - no corners have been cut."
Her cousin is April Showers. And her uncle is Jon Snow.
gremlin wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 3:30 pm
This thread simple baffles me as I can never understand how people can get so worked up about other people's choices.
Bizarre.
Entitlement.
They think they're entitled to tell other people how to live their lives.
Supermofo wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 10:02 am
I know there are school kids not having Measles etc jabs due to parents not wanting it and the only issue is that some of them then get it. Shit happens I guess. But should be a free choice.
Measles is increasing in developed countries and it's down to idiots not vaccinating their kids. Measles can be nasty and it does kill kids. But I agree, it should be free choice and we shouldn't force parents to vaccinate their kids.
However free choice works in other ways. Schools should have the free choice not to accept any kids without a full vaccination record. And they should use it.
gremlin wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 3:30 pm
This thread simple baffles me as I can never understand how people can get so worked up about other people's choices.
Saga Lout wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 2:55 pm
The government that tells us they didn't cut any corners to get the Pfizer vaccine approved. Except they did away with some of the "red tape" or, in other words, they relaxed some of the regulations which in other circumstances they would argue are there to protect us. I.e. they cut some corners.
"The head of the MHRA, Dr June Raine, said that - despite the speed of approval - no corners have been cut."
Which is pretty much from the horses mouth, as they are the regulators. Which interpretation are you referring to?
"Ministers had insisted the UK got the green light first because Brexit had "freed" the country from Brussels red tape - only for the medical regulator to insist it had been working under European law." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-pa ... stract.com
As I said, the government tells us it didn't cut any corners but they did away with some red tape.
There was another BBC article I read that mentioned doing away with red tape, unfortunately I can't find it now.
Saga Lout wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 3:53 pm
There was another BBC article I read that mentioned doing away with red tape, unfortunately I can't find it now.
Probably done away with in the name of red tape reduction.
Supermofo wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 10:02 am
I know there are school kids not having Measles etc jabs due to parents not wanting it and the only issue is that some of them then get it. Shit happens I guess. But should be a free choice.
Measles is increasing in developed countries and it's down to idiots not vaccinating their kids. Measles can be nasty and it does kill kids. But I agree, it should be free choice and we shouldn't force parents to vaccinate their kids.
However free choice works in other ways. Schools should have the free choice not to accept any kids without a full vaccination record. And they should use it.
Compulsory vaccination is a thing in other countries, and not all of them are hardline dictatorships.
Saga Lout wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 3:53 pm
"Ministers had insisted the UK got the green light first because Brexit had "freed" the country from Brussels red tape - only for the medical regulator to insist it had been working under European law." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-pa ... stract.com
As I said, the government tells us it didn't cut any corners but they did away with some red tape.
There was another BBC article I read that mentioned doing away with red tape, unfortunately I can't find it now.
Well "Ministers had insisted the UK got the green light first because Brexit had "freed" the country from Brussels red tape - only for the medical regulator to insist it had been working under European law." sounds like a load of waffle to big-up the Brexit message. The MHRA are in control of what happens in the UK, the EMA for the EU. So nothing to do with red tape but just that obviously different organisations work at different speeds. The actual regulations that are followed are actually very similar.
wheelnut wrote: ↑Thu Dec 03, 2020 3:39 pm
However free choice works in other ways. Schools should have the free choice not to accept any kids without a full vaccination record. And they should use it.
And free choice not to accept sick/disabled kids?
No kids without vaccination records, no sick or disabled kids, no poor kids.
That might catch on.
