# Nearly one in six Britons would refuse Covid-19 vaccine – survey



## Northerner (Jul 7, 2020)

Nearly one in six Britons will refuse a coronavirus vaccine if and when one becomes available, and a similar number are unsure whether they will get one, according to a survey.

The findings come amid a significant rise in anti-vaccination sentiment on social media, and represent a threat to efforts to contain the disease.

“Our hope for a return to normal life rests with scientists developing a successful vaccine for coronavirus,” said Imran Ahmed, the chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a non-profit organisation that commissioned the research. “But social media companies’ irresponsible decision to continue to publish anti-vaccine propaganda means a vaccine may not be effective in containing the virus. The price for their greed is a cost paid in lives.”

According to the polling carried out by YouGov for CCDH, 16% of British adults “probably” or “definitely” will avoid a Covid-19 vaccine. The poll of 1,663 people found differences between those who get the majority of their news from social media and those who rely more on traditional media: the latter were nine percentage points more likely to say they would definitely or probably get the vaccine.









						Nearly one in six Britons would refuse Covid-19 vaccine – survey
					

Campaigners say social media firms behaving irresponsibly over anti-vaccine material




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jul 7, 2020)

Have to keep reminding myself that stupidiy isn't a new thing & so far we've managed to live with it for a few hundred thousand years ... But I just can't imagine what it would be like to be like these people.


----------



## Sally71 (Jul 7, 2020)

They should stay in lockdown then.  When you get the vaccine you could be given some sort of certificate to prove you’ve had it and then your life can return to normal.

Some people are refusing to leave their houses or send their children back to school until there is a vaccine!


----------



## mikeyB (Jul 7, 2020)

I would leap at the opportunity to get a vaccine if one became available. I can remember the days when polio, measles, mumps and diphtheria stalked the land, knocking off one or two schoolmates. The choice then was get vaccinated or die, or become crippled in body or mind.

Same as now.

Anyone who refuses a vaccination is socially irresponsible. Unless you reach 94% of the population, you’ll never eliminate the virus.


----------



## eggyg (Jul 7, 2020)

I, for one, will never feel safe or able to get on with my “ normal” life unless I get the vaccine. It can’t come soon enough. I can’t understand why anyone, unless there’s serious contra indications, wouldn’t want to have it. Do they want to live like this forever? I despair.


----------



## Thebearcametoo (Jul 7, 2020)

I wonder what the stats are for the flu vaccine in terms of people who say they would get it or not (not the actual uptake which is bound to be lower because people don’t follow through).

I get most of my news through social media but it’s news with a good chunk of scientists reviewing data so I would feel fairly secure if there was consensus that a covid vaccine was safe to get it. I can’t see one being produced that’s safe and effective for a couple of years yet realistically so we will still have a year or more of this limbo and people may well change their minds about their preparedness to have the vaccine when they see how covid plays out over the winter and into next year. I don’t think that the government is likely to make vaccination mandatory on being in public and so uptake may never be enough to fully get on top of it in England. That’s if we can get enough supplies anyway with Brexit.


----------



## Docb (Jul 7, 2020)

I'm with mikeyB because the probability of a vaccine doing some good far outweighs the probability of it doing harm.


----------



## Sharron1 (Jul 7, 2020)

Northerner said:


> Nearly one in six Britons will refuse a coronavirus vaccine if and when one becomes available, and a similar number are unsure whether they will get one, according to a survey.
> 
> The findings come amid a significant rise in anti-vaccination sentiment on social media, and represent a threat to efforts to contain the disease.
> 
> ...


How depressingx lots


----------



## Amity Island (Jul 7, 2020)

Northerner said:


> Nearly one in six Britons will refuse a coronavirus vaccine if and when one becomes available, and a similar number are unsure whether they will get one, according to a survey.
> 
> The findings come amid a significant rise in anti-vaccination sentiment on social media, and represent a threat to efforts to contain the disease.
> 
> ...


I don't think anyone would contest that vaccines have done a lot of good in the world and have prevented a lot of deaths from viruses. It does appear that the vast majority of people who get vaccines benefit greatly from them. and society as a whole. This doesn't mean that there aren't those who suffer terribly from vaccinations, especially those left with life long disabilities. I can understand fully why someone would be wary of vaccines. This is why vaccines need to be fully tested over long periods. Unfortunately we are now in a position where the vaccine developed for covid19 will more than likely not have thorough and long term testing for safety and no doubt the manufacturer will have to be indemnified from the government for any adverse reactions to the vaccine. Luckily, we do have a virus damage compensation scheme in the UK which pays £100,000 to anyone left disabled form having a vaccine.





__





						BBC NEWS | Health | £3.5m paid out in vaccine damages
					





					news.bbc.co.uk
				








__





						Vaccine Damage Payment - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jul 7, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> This doesn't mean that there aren't those who suffer terribly from vaccinations, especially those left with life long disabilities.



As I understand, the risk of a serious complication from any of the established vaccines is less than the risk of discovering you're the rightful Czar of All Russia.


----------



## chaoticcar (Jul 7, 2020)

Eddy Edson said:


> As I understand, the risk of a serious complication from any of the established vaccines is less than the risk of discovering you're the rightful Czar of All Russia.


Any scientific evidence ??


----------



## Ljc (Jul 7, 2020)

Imo, if they are able to develop a vaccine for this virus they may rush it out more quickly than they normally would , however when  I read what can happen afterwards to those that have recovered from a bout with this virus, I will take my chances with the vaccine, though I might not attempt to be the first in line with my arm out. 
Like @mikeyB I remember the time when Measles , Mumps , Polio etc stalked the land , sometimes with devastating results .


----------



## Pine Marten (Jul 7, 2020)

I agree with everyone, I have always had available vaccines and I get my flu jab in the winter. Like @mikeyB and @Ljc I remember the days of now-preventable diseases. One of the boys in a family who lived up the road when I was a child caught polio and had to wear calipers. I'm pretty sure there was a boy at my primary school too who had them. And in the past couple of years there have been outbreaks of measles both here and in other countries partly (I believe) because of false info spread by anti-vaxxers.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jul 7, 2020)

chaoticcar said:


> Any scientific evidence ??



In pre-print, not peer reviewed yet.


----------



## grovesy (Jul 7, 2020)

I have some reservations mainly about the speed and wether it will be properly tested.


----------



## trophywench (Jul 7, 2020)

Well I'm 70, I had all the current baby vaccinations in 1950 and all that have become necessary since - first I remember though was the course of the original Polio vaccinations - 3 with a month in between them, followed by a booster one at some greater interval after that, TB one at senior school, various ones as required/advised before holidays in Goa, Kerala and the Dom Republic and annual Flu ones since whenever us lucky diabetics could have them (cos we could get em long before the Muggles could, unless they were also immuno compromised like us, or elderly)

Since my lifespan is now limited by both age and other co morbidities anyway - I'm 200% sure I'll be wanting one - but preferably just not as one of the guinea pigs when they do the human trials thanks.  Subject to as has already been said - no actual medical contra indications becoming apparent by the time I get it.

Covid 19 is much like other life threatening diagnoses - Pete's type of cancer meant he logically had 10 years before he'd pop his clogs.  Doesn't sound all that bad really does it, when you are in your 60s already?  However - when the really up to date consultant then adds 'But unfortunately nobody can guess how ill you may be or for how long either, before you finally expire.  So the decision is yours, treat it or let it run its course.  Were you my dad, I know what I'd want him to do.'

If you have a chance to avoid summat that's either going to kill you or leave your life compromised should you catch it - why the hell not do your best to avoid the thing?


----------



## Lilian (Jul 7, 2020)

I knew a doctor (now deceased), a virologist, who I admired and whose opinions I respected.   The question of vaccines being dangerous has been controversial for a number of years.    He said they were a good thing and I trust his word more than any other.    He was a genuine caring person, not afraid to fight authority if he thought they were wrong, and would risk his career to make sure his patients were well.   He was very proud to be Scottish.    I was not one of his patients but I knew many who were who thought the world of him, so did those who worked with him.    So I would not hesitate to be vaccinated if given the opportunity.


----------



## mikeyB (Jul 7, 2020)

I know of only one vaccine that has caused harm - the oral polio vaccine, which I remember having, but isn't used anymore.

Polio has only one means of spreading - faecal/oral contamination. The oral vaccine was live attenuated (weakened) virus, and ideal for using en masse using otherwise unskilled workers in Africa. The problem arose with parents getting polio, because their babies were pooing out all these attenuated viruses into their nappies, and post change handwashing is not always easy in an African village.

The most spectacular example of this faecal/oral contamination occurred in the UK in 1950s. An outbreak of polio spread rapidly South to North. When they looked closely at the distribution pattern, it followed the West Coast mainline rail from Euston. This was in the days when you weren't allowed to poo when the train was standing in a station. That was because toilets were emptied directly on to the line. They found the source of the contamination by waiting the for the train to get up to speed then flushing whitewash down the loo. When the train stopped they got out to have a look, and the sides of the train were streaked with white, including all the door handles.


----------



## trophywench (Jul 7, 2020)

OMG Mike!  Luckily too young to have had the oral vaccine till we went to the Dom Repub and the surgery nurse doing all the necessary jabs and telling me which anti malarial tablets to go into Boots and buy suggested I have it as a booster, as it was now some time since I was 5 ish and had the vaccines, but we had a casual amusing debate about the cube of sugar being wise - not the substance applied to it or anything else.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Jul 7, 2020)

mikeyB said:


> I know of only one vaccine that has caused harm - the oral polio vaccine, which I remember having, but isn't used anymore.



The one I remember was one kind of avian influenza vaccine causing (or at least associated with) narcolepsy: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/history/narcolepsy-flu.html

(The (in my opinion) stupidity in that case was our parliament's failure to change the rules of our compensatory system. It was a small number of patients with life changing harm at least possibly caused by the vaccine; we should just have paid them sensibly large amounts of money in compensation. Vaccines are really safe, and you don't make people more confident of that by being stingy with compensation on the rare occasions when something seems to have gone wrong.)


----------



## atoll (Jul 7, 2020)

have we forgotten about "gulf war syndrome"many still suffer from the cocktail of vaccines the military were given?


----------



## grovesy (Jul 7, 2020)

Bruce Stephens said:


> The one I remember was one kind of avian influenza vaccine causing (or at least associated with) narcolepsy: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/history/narcolepsy-flu.html
> 
> (The (in my opinion) stupidity in that case was our parliament's failure to change the rules of our compensatory system. It was a small number of patients with life changing harm at least possibly caused by the vaccine; we should just have paid them sensibly large amounts of money in compensation. Vaccines are really safe, and you don't make people more confident of that by being stingy with compensation on the rare occasions when something seems to have gone wrong.)


Funnily enough I heard a bloke saying on the Radio he had this as a result of this vaccine.


----------



## mikeyB (Jul 8, 2020)

atoll said:


> have we forgotten about "gulf war syndrome"many still suffer from the cocktail of vaccines the military were given?


I worked in War Pensions, latterly specifically dealing with “gulf war syndrome” claims. I’m not allowed to discuss how we dealt with the claims, but I can say that vaccines were hardly ever the basis for such claims. I can’t say any more than that because I’m still constrained by the Official Secrets Act.


----------



## Amity Island (Jul 8, 2020)

mikeyB said:


> I worked in War Pensions, latterly specifically dealing with “gulf war syndrome” claims. I’m not allowed to discuss how we dealt with the claims, but I can say that vaccines were hardly ever the basis for such claims. I can’t say any more than that because I’m still constrained by the Official Secrets Act.


Interesting....
Having a quick look at this GWS, seems there were a whole host of possible or perhaps a combination of causes. 
Anthrax and botulinum toxin vaccines. 
Exposure to sarin and cyclosarin and to oil well fire emissions.
Pyridostigmine bromide pills.

A guy I met last year was saying his friend served in the special forces, he said, if ever there was another world war, it wouldn't be the usual methods of war, it would be some kind of global pandemic from a virus, much easier and less costly, plus you can't easily blame anyone for it.


----------



## atoll (Jul 8, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> Interesting....
> Having a quick look at this GWS, seems there were a whole host of possible or perhaps a combination of causes.
> Anthrax and botulinum toxin vaccines.
> Exposure to sarin and cyclosarin and to oil well fire emissions.
> ...


we will just have to see which world power comes up with an effective vaccine and vaccinates their military first....or did that already happen recently in china?


----------



## mikeyB (Jul 8, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> Interesting....
> Having a quick look at this GWS, seems there were a whole host of possible or perhaps a combination of causes.
> Anthrax and botulinum toxin vaccines.
> Exposure to sarin and cyclosarin and to oil well fire emissions.
> ...


There is a vaccine for anthrax, but there is no such thing as a botulinum toxin vaccine. No nerve gases were used in the Gulf War, so nobody was exposed to sarin. Pyridostigmine tablets are used in nerve agent poisoning, and also in anaesthesia to reverse the effect of muscle relaxants. Folk with myasthenia gravis take it for life, and have done for the last forty years with no adverse effects.

And you can't fight a war with a virulent deadly virus unless you can guarantee a long latent period after infection. That's exceptionally difficult, because the deadlier the virus, the shorter is the period between infection and symptoms. And that is why Ebola is struggling to get out of Africa.

The GWS is not the best place to find solid science.


----------



## ColinUK (Jul 8, 2020)

Even if the anti-vaxxers are right and it’s all just a huge conspiracy to implant mind control chips in our bodies I’d still be up for the vaccine. Being a cyborg wouldn’t be that bad as long as I could order the upgrade that gave me laser beam eyes and no insulin resistance!


----------



## atoll (Jul 8, 2020)

ColinUK said:


> Even if the anti-vaxxers are right and it’s all just a huge conspiracy to implant mind control chips in our bodies I’d still be up for the vaccine. Being a cyborg wouldn’t be that bad as long as I could order the upgrade that gave me laser beam eyes and no insulin resistance!


diabetics and others with core morbidities would be the first for the euthanasia vaccine if eugenics are involved.......


----------



## trophywench (Jul 9, 2020)

Is a core morbidity a fatal prognosis?  If so, we all get one of those as soon as we force our way way out of mum and take our first breath,  It's a fact - we ARE all going to die.


----------



## atoll (Jul 9, 2020)

trophywench said:


> Is a core morbidity a fatal prognosis?  If so, we all get one of those as soon as we force our way way out of mum and take our first breath,  It's a fact - we ARE all going to die.


they have ways to treat that in the womb these days before the defective human even becomes a statistic.
in the heyday of eugenics useless eaters had their tubes tied before they could breed!

The fact that Sweden was the first country where a government-funded eugenics (or ‘race biological’) institute was created has been considered a stain on the reputation of the emerging welfare state, made worse by the fact that a law that legitimized the forced sterilization of thousands was enacted in the 1930s.

 "The members of the society were aware that eugenics was politically a tricky subject. They tried to solve the dilemma of mixed political reactions by addressing members of all parties and social groups, emphasizing that questions about biology and social reform were above political or scientific differences."



			https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsnr.2010.0009#:~:text=The%20fact%20that%20Sweden%20was,was%20enacted%20in%20the%201930s
		

.


----------



## Amity Island (Jul 9, 2020)

atoll said:


> they have ways to treat that in the womb these days before the defective human even becomes a statistic.
> in the heyday of eugenics useless eaters had their tubes tied before they could breed!
> 
> The fact that Sweden was the first country where a government-funded eugenics (or ‘race biological’) institute was created has been considered a stain on the reputation of the emerging welfare state, made worse by the fact that a law that legitimized the forced sterilization of thousands was enacted in the 1930s.
> ...


Atoll,
Just had a read of that, makes for a disturbing read, especially considering it's not long ago AND just the first starting point.

Quote

" Sterilization was favoured, as a ‘vaccine’ that would help bring down social and medical costs associated with low genetic quality in a more *humane* (they really do care) way than internment"

That quote alone gives some indication why we have anti-vaxxers.

It's *not *made up, it's *not* ridiculous, it's *not* stupid, it has and does happen. Who's to say there aren't those same sentiments in leaders or movements today?

What if a vaccine did turn out to have sterilizing effects and it had been given to millions of people?

Let's be honest here, how we would know if people had these sentiments? They're hardly going to be broadcast in the news 24hrs a day or publicised in social media.


----------



## mikeyB (Jul 9, 2020)

Eugenic thinking is at the very core of government policy. Limiting child benefit to only the first two children is an absolutely classic eugenic policy. Nobody noticed, which is rather worrying.


----------



## Amity Island (Jul 9, 2020)

mikeyB said:


> Eugenic thinking is at the very core of government policy. Limiting child benefit to only the first two children is an absolutely classic eugenic policy. Nobody noticed, which is rather worrying.


I hadn't realised that policy had changed! 









						Two-child benefit limit pushes families further into poverty – study
					

Parents report stress and strained relationships as a result of benefit cut




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## trophywench (Jul 9, 2020)

My original point was actually sposed to be funny.

There is no such thing as Core morbidity.


----------



## atoll (Jul 9, 2020)

trophywench said:


> My original point was actually sposed to be funny.
> 
> There is no such thing as Core morbidity.


as in shakespeare and his Mortal Coil,to a dyslexic...........


----------

