O/T Are you going to take a vaccine?

Get well soon Andy. How's the grub in there these days, wasn't up to much when I was last in??!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macstheman

Get well soon Andy. How's the grub in there these days, wasn't up to much when I was last in??!!

---

Resting heartbeat of 138 wasn’t good, drugs have calmed it a bit and the family have *******ed me for never saying no when they need help, apparently I need to slow down so I’m going to spend next summer at the cricket listening to Geoff moaning about rA. Being serious, thanks for (all) your concern. Constant move round wards meant I managed to avoid meals!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

**** me, Im agreeing with Swal again! The trouble is that pro Tory pro Johnson advocates such as rA are all too prepared to believe what the government advice is when it doesnt represent an inconvenience to them personally. And before you get all angst ridden rA, that is called sarcasm

---

Tempting offer, but I think I'll pass ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

Resting heartbeat of 138 wasn’t good, drugs have calmed it a bit and the family have *******ed me for never saying no when they need help, apparently I need to slow down so I’m going to spend next summer at the cricket listening to Geoff moaning about rA. Being serious, thanks for (all) your concern. Constant move round wards meant I managed to avoid meals!

---

Sorry to learn your unwell, trust that you will be on the mend soon. Hope you take your family's advice, they clearly want you around a little longer!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Ah well enough said! if you take any credence from what a politician and especially that **** Hancock says on a "panel" show then expect to be misinformed!

Listening to radio 4, reading the Times and the Guardian, reading scientific papers on the tinternet and listening to what various health officials, scientists, have said in the media over the past few days since the announcement.

Admittedly there are variations and differing points of view, most likely because as yet there isn't a coherent strategy (why would that surprise anyone?) agreed yet. Although within 12 months everybody will be offered the vaccine, unless there is a medical reason why they shouldn't take it.

Interestingly Disabled Groups are kicking off today because they aren't currently listed in the governments plans for the first tranche - which is over 70's, vulnerable due to health condition, medical staff, care workers/ nursing home staff and key frontline workers - apparently.

So the answer in short is from a wide range of sources and by evaluating the common thread, rather than what one politician said.

Also the US vaccine today was announced as having been tested on 12 year olds upwards.

---

Just had a look back at your post in which you said you "didn't know where I got my info from" or words to that effect......

In that post you had my post as a quote in there. The very first line was "I know you shouldn't believe a politician but Matt Hancock said on last week's QT, and I paraphrase...."

I had already told you where I got my info from and that you shouldn't believe a politician. Are you losing the plot?

The strange thing about his various answers on QT was that, for the first time since this whole sorry saga started, he actually gave answers that were sensible and logical.

Unlike your response in which, as well as totally missing what was in my original post, your comment on 12 year olds, was that intended to rebut my "not tested on kids" point or was it intended to do no more than provide us with new info?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadAmster

Just had a look back at your post in which you said you "didn't know where I got my info from" or words to that effect......

In that post you had my post as a quote in there. The very first line was "I know you shouldn't believe a politician but Matt Hancock said on last week's QT, and I paraphrase...."

I had already told you where I got my info from and that you shouldn't believe a politician. Are you losing the plot?

The strange thing about his various answers on QT was that, for the first time since this whole sorry saga started, he actually gave answers that were sensible and logical.

Unlike your response in which, as well as totally missing what was in my original post, your comment on 12 year olds, was that intended to rebut my "not tested on kids" point or was it intended to do no more than provide us with new info?

---

Your statement about 18 - 50 year olds not getting it is untrue, they might not get the first batch for obvious reasons, but that wasn't what you said. It was the emphatic nature of your statement as if it was gospel rather than what was in it, aprat from the last part.

The bit about being tested o 12 year olds was a new bit of news thats all, add something to the discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Your statement about 18 - 50 year olds not getting it is untrue, they might not get the first batch for obvious reasons, but that wasn't what you said. It was the emphatic nature of your statement as if it was gospel rather than what was in it, aprat from the last part.

The bit about being tested o 12 year olds was a new bit of news thats all, add something to the discussion.

---

It might not be true but it IS exactly what Hancock said on Question Time. I put, quite clearly, in my post that I was writing what Hancock had said. Ergo, not my statement at all, it was Hancock's and I merely reported it on here.