Jump to content

Accepterez-vous d'être vaccinés par un éventuel vaccin anti-Covid 19?


Votre attitude envers un vaccin anti-Covid 19 :  

17 members have voted

  1. 1. Accepterez-vous d'être vaccinés par un éventuel vaccin anti-Covid 19 ?



Recommended Posts

  • Réponses 74
  • Créé
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Parce que je sais qu'on pourra me forcer à le prendre surtout au travail lol

Et c'est parti pour l'Angleterre !! La campagne de vaccination commence..  Vaccin Pfizer !!            

va te faire vacciner avant qu'il y en ai plus capo !  si le parti d'allah le dit c'est qu'ils ont reçu des informations en haut lieu, du grand chef directement -eux ils ont le telephone mobile du patr

Posted Images

On 26/11/2020 at 20:10, Vanny said:

Sondage pour jauger les attitudes des FAistes envers une campagne vaccinale dans leurs pays de résidence.

Expliquez vos motifs.

salut all

non je laisse mon corps se défendre  tout seul, au risque de passer de l'autre coté. je ne  fais  plus confiance a ces labos

Link to post
Share on other sites

C'est terrible quand-même non? Je veux dire se rendre compte aussi brutalement à quel point nous sommes à la merci des corporations et multinationales qui contrôlent tout, y compris nos corps!!

Confrontés au dilemme vaccin ou chômage, combien choisiront chômage ? Juste un exemple qui pourrait nous affecter tous.

D'un autre côté, si on avait donné le choix aux populations pour les vaccins traditionnels, nous n'aurions jamais réussi a éradiquer les maladies infectieuses telles que le polio, varicelle, ... Est-ce un argument valable pour le Covid-19 cela dit ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vanny said:

C'est terrible quand-même non? Je veux dire se rendre compte aussi brutalement à quel point nous sommes à la merci des corporations et multinationales qui contrôlent tout, y compris nos corps!!

Confrontés au dilemme vaccin ou chômage, combien choisiront chômage ? Juste un exemple qui pourrait nous affecter tous.

D'un autre côté, si on avait donné le choix aux populations pour les vaccins traditionnels, nous n'aurions jamais réussi a éradiquer les maladies infectieuses telles que le polio, varicelle, ... Est-ce un argument valable pour le Covid-19 cela dit ?

la cooccurrence de ces labos peut nous faire avaler des couleuvres

Link to post
Share on other sites

En effet @phenixe, mais pas que ça, y a aussi la question des effets secondaires qui vont sûrement apparaître quand on vaccine des dizaines voire même des centaines de millions de personnes de par le monde !

Dans cette émission radio, le Pr Perronne critique les vaccins de Pfizer et Moderna:

Son argument principal :

le taux de mortalité du Covid-19 ne justifie pas les risques associés à ces vaccins.

Ça répond aussi à ma question ci dessus pour les vaccins traditionnels ou le taux de mortalité excessif des anciennes maladies infectieuses ayant été éradiquées grâce aux vaccins  justifiait la tolérance des risques associés a la vaccination.

Link to post
Share on other sites

en algerie je crois que seuls qq pistonnés seront vaccinés, d'un coté on nous dit   que ca sera en janvier ,de l'autre a partir de janvier et pour six mois il y'a des remboursements pour tous les examens concernant le covid 19 ,puis que la vaccin sera gratuit et pas obligatoire,qq jours apres on c pas encore et la meilleure aucun hopital n'a les moyens de stockage du vaccin en question pour le moment ,apres non et tout ceci du même comité scientifique chargé du suivi de la pandémie  ou règne une grosse confusion en ce moment et des déclarations contradictoires de ses membres  ,avec ses incompetents il y'a meme pas lieu de se poser cette question

Link to post
Share on other sites

Il faut dire qu'il y a des vaccins basés sur la technologie conventionnelle du virus inactivé ou atténué, le vaccin chinois entre dans cette catégorie. Je ne sais pas si c'est le cas pour le vaccin russe?

En tout cas, voici ce que Didou a à dire sur cette question de la vaccination Covid-19 :

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Il a raison le vieux Didier.. 

Toujours dans le mille !!

Un vaccin anti-grippale s'adresse  à une cible (les personnes d'un certain age).. et non pas aux enfants et à la planète entière !! 

 

Mais bon.. 

Il n'est plus question d'obligation.. 

Les politiciens comptent jouer la carte du passeport sanitaire pour engager les masses dans le monde de la science fiction !

Autrement dit.. les labos n'ont pas dit leur dernier mot !!

Ils trouveront les meilleurs procédés pour piquer et code barrer tout le monde.. hihihi

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vous allez trop loin dans vos commentaires vous parlez que du lobby pharmaceutique et vous oubliez la puissance des

Assurances elles est aussi grande que le lobby pharma, je ne pense pas qu'elle accepte de financer aussi facilement .

En plus ils vont vacciner en premier les professionnels de santé, avant monsieur tout le monde, donc je pense qu'il n'y a 

pas que du mauvais. 

Je connais une personne qui fait de la recherche contre le cancer, je lui demanderais à l'occasion, au début du virus

au mois de mars il m'avait  dit qu'il voulait  l'attraper .

Edited by OsiriaS
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/12/2020 at 17:03, OsiriaS said:

il m'avait  dit qu'il voulait  l'attraper .

Attraper quoi ? Le virus ? Oui c'est l'équivalent naturel d'un vaccin mais si son système immunitaire est défaillant ou il appartient à une catégorie à risque, il risque d'y passer  😬

Enfin je dis ça mais al a3mar bi yed Allah, on a vu ici en Algérie parmi nos voisins, collègues ... etc des gens condamnés selon les critères scientifiques mais qui ont survécu au Covid-19!! Et aussi l'inverse, des gens qui ne souffraient de rien qui y ont succombé, rabbi yerham'houm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

C'est grave, le UK est le premier pays dans le monde à avoir homologué le premier vaccin mARN destiné a l'utilisation humaine ! (Pfizer)

Tous les spécialistes et les agences de régulation des médicaments (FDA, EMA,...) se demandent sur quelle base l'agence britannique l'a fait puisque les résultats des essais cliniques de phase 3 pour ce vaccin personne ne les a vus!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Q&A informatif sur le vaccin Pfizer et comment le UK a pu l'approuver si rapidement! Publié dans la revue 'British Medical Journal' (BMJ)

How was the MHRA able to approve the vaccine so quickly?

The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency gave temporary authorisation to the supply of specific batches of Pfizer and BioNTech’s vaccine on 2 December, on the basis of efficacy data submitted between 1 October and 2 December 2020. The regulator credits the rapid turnaround to its “rolling review” process, which allowed it to analyse the data as they were submitted.

The MHRA has not published specific details about the approval process, but a spokesperson told The BMJ that scientists and clinicians had “carefully and scientifically reviewed the safety, quality, and effectiveness data—how [the vaccine] protects people from covid-19 and the level of protection it provides.”

The agency added, “The data included results from the lab and clinical trials in humans, manufacturing and quality controls, product sampling, and testing of the final product. This process is designed to make sure that any vaccine approved meets the expected high standards of safety, quality, and effectiveness.”

Phase III data from the Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine trial have not yet been published.

Why was the vaccine given temporary authorisation?

Usually, the UK would wait for the European Medicines Agency to approve a vaccine before looking to distribute it, but in an emergency EU countries are allowed to use their own regulator to issue temporary authorisation. In October the government made changes to the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 to allow the MHRA to grant temporary authorisation of a covid-19 vaccine without needing to wait for the EMA.

A temporary use authorisation is valid for one year only and requires the pharmaceutical companies to complete specific obligations, such as ongoing or new studies, says the law firm Brodies. Once comprehensive data on the product have been obtained, standard marketing authorisation can be granted. This initially lasts five years but can be renewed and is not subject to specific obligations.

Have only certain batches of the vaccine been approved?

Yes, but this is the standard procedure for all new vaccines, says David Salisbury, David director of immunisation at the Department of Health for England until the end of 2013 and now an associate fellow for the global health programme at the think tank Chatham House.

He explained, “Each batch of vaccine that gets released for use will have gone through both the manufacturer’s own testing and independent external testing from an agency such as the NIBSC [National Institute for Biological Standards and Control]. And until NIBSC is satisfied, and the manufacturer is able to provide the evidence and the regulator is satisfied, all batches get tested.”

What about other European countries?

Most European Union countries are waiting for the EMA to grant approval. The EMA has said it will decide by 29 December whether to provisionally authorise the Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine. Unlike the UK’s temporary authorisation, the EMA is hoping to grant the vaccine “conditional marketing authorisation” for its use in any EU country.

The Swiss medical regulator Swissmedic has said it did not have all the data it needed to approve the vaccines, especially when it came to use in people with pre-existing illnesses. “We lack data on the effectiveness of the clinical trials and on the important subgroups that participated in these large studies,” said Claus Bolte, head of Swissmedic’s authorisation division, at a press briefing on 1 December.

Does approval have anything to do with Brexit?

Though some MPs have suggested that this approval process has been made possible only because the UK is leaving the European Union, Salisbury said that is not true. The MHRA acted in line with EU regulations, and any other EU country could have done the same, he said.

Stephen Evans, professor of pharmacoepidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, has said that still being in the transition period may have helped speed up the approval because UK staff have not had to assess new vaccines or drugs intended for the whole EU for the past 18 months, allowing them to focus on the UK authorisation.

However, this will change from 1 January 2021 when the MHRA will become responsible for handling all applications for new drugs and vaccines to be authorised in the UK.

And the US?

Leaders in the US seemed to have criticised the UK’s process, with US Food and Drug Administration commissioner Stephen Hahn and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci suggesting that the US’s approval system was better.

Hahn, who was called to the White House to explain why the US would not be the first country to distribute a vaccine,5 said in a recent interview, “We’re not going to take a summary from a company and take their conclusions and base our decision on that . . . We’re going to crunch the numbers ourselves.”

Fauci said that the US had the “gold standard of a regulatory approach” and that “the UK did not do it as carefully” but later apologised, saying, “Our process is one that takes more time than it takes in the UK. I did not mean to imply any sloppiness even though it came out that way.”

Salisbury said he trusted the MHRA’s scrutiny. “I have full confidence that they will have undertaken due diligence. They will have scrutinised all of the information as thoroughly as was appropriate. And to my knowledge, neither Tony Fauci, for whom I have great respect and know, or the FDA commissioner were members of the MHRA.”

The MHRA defended its processes. A spokesperson told The BMJ, “Covid-19 vaccines, including this one, are being developed in a coordinated way that allows some stages of this process to happen in parallel to condense the time needed, but it does not mean steps and the expected standards of safety, quality, and effectiveness have been bypassed.”

Who will get the vaccine first?

Although care home residents were initially deemed the highest priority for vaccination, the challenge of delivering the vaccine at −70°C and the fact it comes in batches of 975 doses have meant a change to plans. From 8 December care home staff and people aged over 80 will be called in to 50 “hospital hubs” around England for their first vaccination and recalled three weeks later for their second shot. Any appointments not used will go to healthcare staff at higher risk of serious illness from covid-19. Once more vaccine becomes available, more than 1000 local vaccination centres, operated by groups of GPs, will be set up across the country, and pharmacies will also be able to deliver shots after vaccine units can be split. The health services in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland will run their own vaccination programmes.

Do people who have had covid-19, including those with long covid, need to be vaccinated?

Yes, says Salisbury. “We do not know the length of immunity of the natural infection and therefore having a vaccine will not do them harm and has the probability of doing the benefit . . . I can’t think of reasons why you should not be vaccinated,” he said. “And we do know that people who’ve had covid can be reinfected. My judgment would be, if you’re offered the vaccine, to have it. But there are many questions to which as yet we don’t have evidence based answers.”

If I’m vaccinated do I still need to self-isolate?

Government sources told the Telegraph that “people who get vaccinated will have to stick to the same rules as everyone else because we don’t know if it stops people being carriers and passing the virus on to others.”

Who shouldn’t be vaccinated?

The vaccine has not been approved for use in pregnant women, and women of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least two months after their second dose. The vaccine should also not be used during breastfeeding.

People receiving “anticoagulant therapy or those with a bleeding disorder that would contraindicate intramuscular injection should not be given the vaccine unless the potential benefit clearly outweighs the risk of administration,” the MHRA has said.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation has also specified that only children (under 16) at “very high risk of exposure and serious outcomes, such as older children with severe neuro-disabilities that require residential care, should be offered vaccination.”

Do we know anything about interactions with other drugs?

No. In guidance to healthcare professionals the MHRA said that “no interaction studies have been performed.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

contrairement aux us et coutumes ou les labos lançaient sur leurs propre fond les recherches sur un vaccin qui pouvaient s’étaler sur plusieurs années avec des étapes et des protocoles biens définis, pour la covid 19, les labos ont été inondé d'argents à l'avance et cerise sur le gâteau, ils ont reçus l'assurance d'une immunité total pour tous les risques et effets secondaires qui pourraient résultés de ce vaccin.

le seul qui a respecter à l'heure actuel le protocole de validation des trois étapes et  celui de moderna car dès janvier, dans le plus grand secret et  ils avaient mis aux point un vaccin et commencés les essais.        

Edited by momo 18
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Répondre

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...