Are you getting vaccinated?

[ubuysa]

OK, let me clear up some things.
The misinformation (as you put it) is being spread by the Irish health service in this case. I don't have an opinion on any of this, as there are simply too many conflicting reports (all from official agencies).
I never said the vaccination doesn't work. What I said was it does not prevent spread or contracting the virus. I do believe it helps though.

I also wouldn't hold US data in high regard. The health industry there and big pharma are an entire world onto themselves. I am not saying they are falsifying stuff, but on a global level, US data is to be taken with a pinch of salt...generally.
In Europe generally, each country is also coming up with its own guidelines and regulations etc.
As I say, I have no real opinion and I don't care much for the topic. It is not my place to say what people inject into their own body. I am vaccinated fully, but I also don't feel any safer to be honest.

As mentioned, the people I know who have contracted the virus, all were vaccinated. I don't know of anyone who has contracted it who is unvaccinated. My country has one of the highest uptakes globally, and yet our health service is saying cases are going out of control. So either the vaccine prevents spread, or it does not.
It looks like it does not, but I do think the outcomes for those vaccinated ought to be better vs unvaccinated.

Just my thoughts, and I am not trying to convince anyone to think any differently. I simply don't know enough and I cannot (yet) trust official data sources with certainty.

There is no hope for some people. Suggesting that the CDC is in the pocket of 'big pharma' shows a complete lack of understanding of the role of the CDC. Is the WHO in the pocket of 'big pharma' too? Because they're saying the same thing.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

 

[Gary S]

There is no hope for some people. Suggesting that the CDC is in the pocket of 'big pharma' shows a complete lack of understanding of the role of the CDC. Is the WHO in the pocket of 'big pharma' too? Because they're saying the same thing.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Please read my comment
"I am not saying they are falsifying stuff,"

I know how the CDC works, I also know how big Pharma works. I am a shareholder in a pharma company (publicly traded), and I can tell you this much, the only thing management and shareholders care about is the profitability of the company and the net margins it operates on. When a new drug is released, there is always a push to lighten the requirements. It is also common knowledge that the initial requirements in place are to a greater degree, obsolete. For example, how do you restrict a drug that you know nothing about. This is the big plus of big pharma....they can write the script to some degree, and they do. Nothing necessarily wrong with it, as the reputational damage if they get careless, is too large...but like anything, money can be thrown at it (J&J as an example).
Lobbying WHO, CDC, or any other national health "advisor" is par for the course, and we expect management to do so.
My day job also is consulting with companies from many different sectors, and you'd be surprised at the amount of lobbying that goes on. Some organizations even have it as part of their processes on a particular piece of work. Costed in and resourced.
Again, I am not saying they are falsifying stuff, but our perspectives on how these things actually work are vastly different.

 

[SpyderTracks]

Please read my comment
"I am not saying they are falsifying stuff,"

I know how the CDC works, I also know how big Pharma works. I am a shareholder in a pharma company (publicly traded), and I can tell you this much, the only thing management and shareholders care about is the profitability of the company and the net margins it operates on. When a new drug is released, there is always a push to lighten the requirements. It is also common knowledge that the initial requirements in place are to a greater degree, obsolete. For example, how do you restrict a drug that you know nothing about. This is the big plus of big pharma....they can write the script to some degree, and they do. Nothing necessarily wrong with it, as the reputational damage if they get careless, is too large...but like anything, money can be thrown at it (J&J as an example).
Lobbying WHO, CDC, or any other national health "advisor" is par for the course, and we expect management to do so.
My day job also is consulting with companies from many different sectors, and you'd be surprised at the amount of lobbying that goes on. Some organizations even have it as part of their processes on a particular piece of work. Costed in and resourced.
Again, I am not saying they are falsifying stuff, but our perspectives on how these things actually work are vastly different.

If we could pay off this train off discussion, it's a little too political which is against forum rules.

If we could keep it to the thread title please.

 

[ubuysa]

I'm going to lock this thread now. The original sensible purpose of the thread has been usurped. That's a shame.

 

[Monarch]

This is a topic that can quickly move from challenging to incendiary.

While parties on all sides hope to learn and understand more from each other; with the deeply personal perspectives and biases - assumed or otherwise, digging deeper than a most surface level discussion of vaccinations is outside the scope of discussion that can be facilitated here.

My comments here are not in relation to Vaccines but to acknowledge the prickly areas of 'discussion' that will naturally arise. Intent and sincerity can be easily lost and I support the locking of the thread.