Will you take covid-19 vaccine?

[Woot 361]

Yes.

[waffle fairy 28]

im such a rebel

 

no

[I Kill Batty 283]

Nah, I don't get anything of the sort

[BleakTerror 451]

8 hours ago, Adam_ said:

assuming it's proven safe/effective, yes

 

 

[Vanzant 1,383]

Unlikely, if they forced you for travelling purposes obviously I would have to consider since my family wants to travel. I mean going to jamaica or mexico they already make you take a shot as it is.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Vanzant

[≈Vanuckle 2,136]

Yep.

[Alex 35]

Yes

[Josh 137]

To people saying “when it’s safe and effective”, what does that actually mean? 
 

You wouldn’t be able to take it if it wasn’t licensed in your country, and licensing is about certifying safety and efficacy amongst others. 

Just wondering if you mean “after a year” or what?

 

The only unknown is how long you have antibodies for. It may be that you only have enough antibodies for 3 months, and that kinda changes things. Mass vaccinations wouldn’t make sense beyond the vulnerable if that was the case; hopefully not but we will see 

 

[Wee Man 1,348]

11 hours ago, Dickus said:

Yes? I’d let them inject it in my dick at this point.

 

If anyone actually would refuse a vaccine they’re certifiably retarded.

This.

[Mk 17 149]

Yea I’d take the nanobots 

 

but I’m pretty sure by the looks of things none of us even writing on this topic will get the opportunity to have it, there’s like a list of people that are gonna get it which generally follows being the most vulnerable from the looks of things and the UK only has enough for 20mil fellas so far, maybe in 2/3 years we will all get it but unfortunately I doubt atm we will be lucky enough ☹️

[≈Flukejiver 1,185]

5 hours ago, Josh said:

To people saying “when it’s safe and effective”, what does that actually mean? 
 

You wouldn’t be able to take it if it wasn’t licensed in your country, and licensing is about certifying safety and efficacy amongst others. 

Just wondering if you mean “after a year” or what?

 

The only unknown is how long you have antibodies for. It may be that you only have enough antibodies for 3 months, and that kinda changes things. Mass vaccinations wouldn’t make sense beyond the vulnerable if that was the case; hopefully not but we will see 

 

Well I think it’s the initial rush of developing a vaccine that people are worried about since COVID has been pretty crazy. I think it’s more of a way to make them feel better about getting it since if the vaccine is released, hopefully they’ve determined it’s safe and effective. But even so, i would probably stillI doubt a majority of the people won’t have a chance at getting it for awhile like @Mk 17 said 

[€dnd5 1,001]

5 hours ago, Josh said:

To people saying “when it’s safe and effective”, what does that actually mean? 
 

You wouldn’t be able to take it if it wasn’t licensed in your country, and licensing is about certifying safety and efficacy amongst others. 

Just wondering if you mean “after a year” or what?

 

The only unknown is how long you have antibodies for. It may be that you only have enough antibodies for 3 months, and that kinda changes things. Mass vaccinations wouldn’t make sense beyond the vulnerable if that was the case; hopefully not but we will see 

 

A lot of ‘red tape’ was cleared so a vaccine could be developed and certified much faster than normal. I understand if people are a little cautious about something that was developed and approved in 10 months instead of the years it would normally take.  However, getting covid I think is more damaging to your long term health than this vaccine will be so I would be willing to take it. My only question is how long the immunity will last, which by the time most of us have the chance to get this vaccine we should know more about. 

[Jack 70]

Nah

[Josh 137]

29 minutes ago, dnd5 said:

A lot of ‘red tape’ was cleared so a vaccine could be developed and certified much faster than normal. I understand if people are a little cautious about something that was developed and approved in 10 months instead of the years it would normally take.  However, getting covid I think is more damaging to your long term health than this vaccine will be so I would be willing to take it. My only question is how long the immunity will last, which by the time most of us have the chance to get this vaccine we should know more about. 

Sure, but what is the exact red tape that was 'cleared' that makes you, or people, concerned? 

I keep hearing people repeat that on Facebook but I've never seen anything specific. 

The only part of Phase III that is different is the efficacy rate of the vaccine (which for FDA was set at 50% IIRC), but has nothing to do with safety. 

 

Most companies have pledged there won't be shareholder profit from a vaccine, and the reason regulatory has been faster is because huge amounts of money have been spent at risk to the companies. Usually it's slower because companies aren't willing to risk so much capital up front. 

 

So ye, as my original question: What exactly are people waiting for who say "yes if it's safe". If you don't trust the safety of your regulator, then why would you even say yes? It doesn't make sense to me; you either trust the experts or you don't. 

 

[Ssj 909]

5 hours ago, Mk 17 said:

Yea I’d take the nanobots 

 

but I’m pretty sure by the looks of things none of us even writing on this topic will get the opportunity to have it, there’s like a list of people that are gonna get it which generally follows being the most vulnerable from the looks of things and the UK only has enough for 20mil fellas so far, maybe in 2/3 years we will all get it but unfortunately I doubt atm we will be lucky enough ☹️

We're all boomers here bro, we'll be the first on the list kappa