POLL: Would you be willing to have a COVID vaccine when they become available?

Hi Kim,

It's a tricky one but without going into a lot of detail I wouldn't have one in the near future.

Maybe years down the line but who knows what else will be thrown at us by then :)

My opinion: 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867420308175

When "they" have a vaccine for the common cold virus cure, or ongoing, mutating protein D614G, until then, we all believe in masks.

This goes on.

V

Hi kim, will be interesting to see how the poll turns out.. for me, no way, not untill every member of parliament have theirs and i can witness that they have actually had it and they've not just said they have!! 

Hi Madcatwoman,

I agree it's a difficult question and I don't think there are any 'right' or 'wrong' answers, especially this early in our understanding of Covid-19.

I'm 59 years old (higher risk) with no pre-existing health conditions (lower risk).  Knowing what we do now about the transmission of Covid-19, I feel that, to some extent, I have control over whether I catch the virus, although less so the extent to which I may be affected by it, should I get it.  The reason I'm 'Undecided' isn't because I'm concerned about the safety of any vaccine, but whether, given my risk profile, I actually need it?

I remember on a previous forum discussion about the 'flu virus, a member said what a terrible reaction she'd had to the 'flu vaccine.  Of course, Covid-19 is NOT the 'flu, but it prompted me to ask my neighbour whether the 'flu vaccine included a "live" virus and, if so, would that be why some people experience an adverse reaction?  He told me the 'flu vaccine is a "killed" virus and, as such, it wouldn't cause a bad reaction; however, other elements are included in the mix to deliberately provoke a reaction of the patient's immune system.  He also told me that any Covid-19 vaccine could only include a "killed" virus and that we shouldn't be worried about the speed with which a vaccine may become available because, in the case of Covid-19, there has been no compromise on the number of people in the trials, rather the timeframe in which the trials are taking place.  This suggests to me that those people who have volunteered to be part of the trials are very brave indeed because, even if there is no immediate adverse reaction, perhaps there may be a longer term effect that can't currently be predicted?  Time will tell.......

Stay safe!

Kim

Thanks Villas and Dave for your comments - interesting that those of us who have commented so far are 'Undecided' or 'Not on your Nelly!', yet the majority vote so far is for 'Yes'.  I wonder if this majority is from those I regard as being "very brave", or who have a high risk profile for a poor outcome should they catch it?  (Although I appreciate that, with only 10 votes at the time of writing, this weighting is probably the result of just one extra vote ;o)

I was very concerned in the early stages of the virus, when the WHO and governments around the World began to place emphasis on the wearing of face masks, that people wouldn't remember the ongoing importance of hand washing and sanitizing - and, of course, that is extremely important.  However, more recent understanding of 'aerosol' transmission proves the equal importance of mask wearing too.  I'm not surprised that the Science Direct paper arrives at no definitive conclusion regarding the impact of the D614G protein, but I do believe that it shows how much more has yet to be proven before we are likely to get closer to a one-size-fits-all vaccine.

Really interested to see further comments.

Kind regards,

Kim

Hi Kim,

    it is worth reading the WHO document attached on vaccine myths and misconceptions to help in deciding whether to have a covid19 vaccination. It addresses a lot of the common concerns raised and gives a balanced view on vaccination. 

 Re covid9 vaccination - for me it depends upon to what degree the vaccine is shown to be effective and whether it requires the majority of people to be vaccinated for it to control the spread of the virus. In principle I am for a vaccine that reduces the overall risk of the disease. 

  I am not a anti-vaxxer and so would support vaccinations as a means of controlling and hopefully eliminating disease. 

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/vaccines-and-immunization-myths-and-misconceptions  

Rgds,

Aitch.

Hi aitch,

I'm not an anti-vaxxer either.  You only have to look at the impact of discredited doctor, Andrew Wakefield, and his role in the drop in numbers of children having the MMR vaccine, to see the dangers of pseudo science and the motivation of those who peddle it.  One of my concerns about the speed with which Covid-19 vaccines could become available is whether their production is driven by kudos and potential profit-generation for the pharmas and academic institutions involved in their development.  I'd also like to see what, if anything, is being done to take account of the greater susceptibility to poor outcomes for people of Black and Asian ethnicities, and whether this requires a different vaccine to be developed specifically for those people.  In the meantime, I believe our best defence lies in prevention, which is why I think understanding the most likely forms of transmission are so important.

Stay safe,

Kim

Yes, I would but I certainly wouldn't want to be anywhere near to the top of the queue. I take my hat off to the trialists and am most grateful for their bravery.

Hi, 

"It is worth noting that four coronaviruses already circulate in human beings. They cause common cold symptoms and we don't have vaccines for any of them."

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51665497

V