• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

[COVID-19] General Discussion

I qualify for a booster (or will in a week or two anyway) - just I qualified for early vaccination.
But I consider myself to be low risk, and I'm still taking all the precautions at work, including the unnecessary ones, and I still don't really socialise, so I'll be waiting until contacted by my GP - and there's a decent chance that'll never happen (I don't think the GP cares about the profession based criteria).
I'm okay with that.
I got a good strong reaction to the initial shot, and I've a generally good immune system; and I've largely kept my Vit D levels up
 
Yeh that was the other question asked at the walk in clinic and by the person I spoke to on 119: are you a health worker? Which I am not. ATM there are people who need it more than I do so happy to wait for any booster offered.
 

The government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) estimates the protection against needing hospital treatment for a Covid infection falls:

from 95% three months after a second dose of AstraZeneca to 75% after six months

from 99% three months after a second dose of Pfizer to 90% after six months.

The protection against symptomatic disease falls from 65% to 45% over the same time period with two jabs of the AstraZeneca vaccine, and from 90% to 65% for two jabs of Pfizer.
 
So I'm on 6 months post-pfizer, and I was already in no rush for a booster.
If I'm still at 90% protection from hospitalisation, and 65% from infection - I'm happy with that.

Okay be healthcare, but I'm lowish risk (since tripled my exercise and lost 6kg over the last 9 months), taking all precautions, barely socialising at all. There are higher priorities than I for that shot.

It's not a zero-sum game though, if I decline if/when offered. That dose won't go to someone else for their 1st / 2nd dose - so I'll take it if/when the GP gets around to me. I won't go out of my way, or kick up a fuss just yet though (like I had to in January/February).
Maybe at 75% and 50%
 
IMO - doesn't go far enough.
Should be "all healthcare staff" (except for those with medical exemptions) - including the likes of myself and colleagues who used our healthcare status to stay open during lockdowns. This is the rough for that smooth (for those who find it rough).

We already have compulsory vaccination for other things, like Hep.C - I see no reason to limit this to the NHS.

If you're a healthcare professional - but you don't believe in vaccines - then feel free not to be a healthcare professional any more.
If you're a healthcare professional - but you don't believe that prevention trumps cure - then feel free not to be a healthcare professional any more.
 
In very unsurprising news the report most cited when saying ivermectin works for covid treatment has been found to have faked it's numbers and has been retracted
 

But this country is not corrupt.

I'll see if I can find it, but there was a story on Facebook about how the government is storing faulty PPE in containers owned by the same company who provided the faulty PPE in the first place.
 
Does anyone know how long the booster takes to be effective? My grandparents are getting it tomorrow and I'd planned to drive up and see them next Saturday but with me at the match and covid fairly rife in Dublin right now I might push it back.

Did a bit of a search there but not much info.
 
Does anyone know how long the booster takes to be effective? My grandparents are getting it tomorrow and I'd planned to drive up and see them next Saturday but with me at the match and covid fairly rife in Dublin right now I might push it back.

Did a bit of a search there but not much info.
Seven days, according to this:
 

Lol. Take a bath containing baking soda, epsom salts and the cleaning agent borax, which will "detox the vaxx" from anyone who has received a jab.
I think we shouldn't try to hard to disprove this nonsense. If the idiots will get the vaccine thinking they can "detox" it afterwards, then that's a positive, even if the braindead morons are doing it for the wrong reason.
 
In very unsurprising news the report most cited when saying ivermectin works for covid treatment has been found to have faked it's numbers and has been retracted
Obviously this has nothing to do with Ivermectin costing 6 cents and being available from Who and the new Pfizer drug coming on the market that costs a couple of grand?
 
Sounds a bit tinfoil for my tastes,
There's no scientific proof Ivermectin is a legitimate option - everytime a study comes out from some dodgy source it fails peer review because they've falsified data

If anything it feels more the otherway - Ivermectin producers trying to get more people to buy/prescribe their product
 

Latest posts

Top