Unlikely but you also have a couple of per cent chance of long covid and potentially dealing with positive covid status (a lot of mafan!!!). Well it may not prevent infection of course .
A vaccine that practically eliminates covid complications and probably prevents transmission onwards is a pretty good option to me.
Wtf are you talking about. They all have gone through rigourous testing.
Oh God 
you are one of those who believed Trump that it would be gone by easter, arenât you?
My apologies, the PC term is vaccine hesitant 
I am. I want the vaccine so I donât get the virus and possibly spread it to others, especially my family
LOL.
Just because some tests have been done does not mean that the vaccines have been shown to be either effective or safe. As someone else mentioned, these things are only fully understood when theyâve been in use for many years.
Unless you have a science background and some practical experience in the technology sector, you may not appreciate how bloody difficult it is to ensure that some novel (or even halfway novel) technique is safe. Apart from anything else, you have to first decide on your definitions of âsafeâ and âeffectiveâ.
uh ⌠no. Iâm one of those people who believe it wonât be âgoneâ for many years, if ever.
Iâm saying that because I am reasonably fit, reasonably young, and donât have any metabolic diseases, Iâm in that group of people who have a one-in-1000 chance of developing anything more serious than a fever and a cough.
I do. If it wasnât safe, it would be released. Everyone in the world wanted to be the first, but no one wants to deal with an unforseen issue after itâs been delivered.
Look at Russia, no way Iâd take that one. I wonât touch a Chinese vaccine either. But I have confidence in the 3 main ones, looking at how their final trials go
Take your own advice and apply it to this. Weâre starting to see it attacks other areas of the body including the brain. I wouldnât be so cocky.
Why will Big-pharma face no liabilities should anything go wrong with the fastest ever vaccine rollout to hit the market?
Why shouldnât all industry be given the same privileges when something goes wrong?
Seriously, you have no idea how this works. Harmful tech gets released all the time, either because people didnât cover the harmful scenario in the test programme or because they just donât care. Itâs usually the first one. Humans are fallible; it doesnât matter how much you trust them.
Iâll take my chances, thanks. Iâm not an anti-vaxxer. However I do know enough about life sciences, and the use of technology generally, to mistrust bleeding-edge inventions. All medical interventions involve some sort of tradeoff, and I think humanity is barking up the wrong tree with this one.
What on earth is that incorrectly capitalized, badly-hyphenated atrocity?
Donât worry, theyâll have a vaccine for that sort of thing soon.
Quick - edit out the unnecessary hyphen after the adverb ending -ly while you still have time. 
Too late now. You quoted me, m*&^%$^&!
Thanks for the assumption. Please post a copy of your PhD
Sure, but donât you think this time they put a little more effort to make sure. Pretty much everyone in the world will be taking this.
Again, take your own advice. Youâre overly cautious about the vaccine but dead set youâre right about the symptoms you might get.
whatever you sayâŚ
Agreed
This seems to be based on opinion, not science.
I hope you use that science background to weigh the options more carefully. Weâre just now learning about the long term impacts of the virus. We need the majority of people to be vaccinated for it to work
You show me yours and Iâll show you mine.
No. Not least because theyâre being indemnified by world governments. Iâm sure nobody wants bad stuff to happen. Itâs unlikely that bad stuff will happen. But I still donât see any obvious need to try it and see.
And as I observed, I will no doubt be forced to, at regular intervals, at my own expense. Thatâs the world we live in today. Iâm just glad I wonât be around for many more years to see what humanity dreams up for the next round of stupid shit.
Iâve had several vaccinations and would have no objection to getting more for dangerous diseases.
Yes, itâs opinion. But I get pretty irritated by the idea that science sets out all the answers for us. It does not. Opinions and judgement calls are still the only thing weâve got when it comes to policy decisions. Science merely gives us some facts, and some ways of finding out facts that we donât yet know. That might sound incredibly useful, but in practice it doesnât make hard decisions a whole lot simpler.
This isnât true.
This is a dynamic process with an inherently unpredictable trajectory. We can take a few guesses at possible future scenarios, but vaccinating everyone will not guarantee that it will all just go away. As someone else mentioned, it could potentially introduce selection pressures that drive the survival of a more dangerous mutation.
To achieve herd immunity and âcontrolâ the virus with regular annual mass vaccinations as the virus mutates each year?
Why not just vaccinate the elderly and vulnerable? Far more targeted and would save a fortune. Whatâs the point of vaccinating people the vast majority of whom will experience few if any symptoms? I donât get the arguments supporting herd immunity via universal vaccination which were exactly the same as those dismissed when people suggested naturally acquired herd immunity earlier in the year.
What is it with the blind love for lockdowns and vaccines? We donât vaccinate everybody on the planet every year for Influenza A. People at risk are advised to get vaccinated and take their chances if they choose not to.
We still donât know if that will be necessary.
I take advice from public health officials. They were right and we saw the huge failures in places that attempted herd immunity. Itâs not blind love⌠Facts and evidence.
Because this virus has a lot of asymptomatic people. Thatâs why itâs been able to spread so easily.
There was a study in China [Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China | Nature Communications] that showed there were no infections spread by asymptomatic people.
This anti-vaxxer term is being bandied about now all over the media. It will be aligned with the R word, terrorism, etc⌠In the UK the 77th Brigade or a âinformation warfareâ unit (as reported at the weekend) will be scouring the web to tell the serfs that the C19 vaccine is the bees knees and those that question it are Satan
Nothing to do with the medical political complex and their tried and tested vaccines of courseâŚ
Iâm not making myself understood.
If elderly and high-risk people are vaccinated, why bother vaccinating everyone else? What is the goal?
Itâs hard to figure out how much of the scaremongering on the theme of âitâs not just the elderly, there are lots of lingering effectsâ is really true, and/or if there are other factors involved. One of the frustrating things about the whole crisis is trying to sort out the bullshit from verified facts. I wonder how this would have panned out in pre-internet days?
Anyway, although Iâm being flippant about the money aspect, the simple fact is that the pharma companies cannot possibly recoup their investment if they vaccinate only the at-risk individuals (what, 5-10% of the population?). So they have to bull up the story that everyone can benefit.
I think the vaccine roll-out is generally a good thing, mainly because it will help put an end to the incredibly harmful lockdowns and air travel bans. I donât want to be a guinea pig though, so I wonât be trying to get a place at the front of the line.