health

COVID vaccine acceptance rising in some countries: study

16 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

16 Comments
Login to comment

This is expected since most of the misinformation that antivaxers try to push to make people unnecessarily anxious is gradually been proved false, the lack of the supposed terrible consequences of vaccinating millions of people make those that are rational to question the veracity of that mistaken predictions and realize the vaccine is actually safe as the experts have been saying all along.

Reality will never be enough to convince those that put too much of their own self-value on opposing science and vaccines, but for the rest of the population looking at the real effects of the vaccine greatly enhance their trust on it.

6 ( +13 / -7 )

This is expected since we are constantly bombarded about people dying "from" Covid and the side effects of the infection, while minimizing and/or censoring information about the vaccines' serious adverse reactions.

If we had an honest and open discussion about Covid-related topics, I suspect less people would get the vaccine.

-8 ( +5 / -13 )

This is expected since we are constantly bombarded about people dying "from" Covid and the side effects of the infection, while minimizing and/or censoring information about the vaccines' serious adverse reactions.

No such thing, just debunking misleading information from antivaxxers where they blame anything negative that happens to people after vaccination, even if non-vaccinated people have the same problems, sometimes even at higher rates. That cannot be called censoring, just correcting information purposefully manipulated to give a false impression.

There is an honest and open discussion about COVID-19 all over the world, but unfortunately for antivaxxers mistaken information and lies are not part of honest discussions which is why argument based on those kind of fasehoods are not included.

Fortunately for the rest of the population that perfectly valid way to discriminate out proven false and mistaken information helps in the acceptance of a safe and effective health measure that improves importantly public health.

5 ( +12 / -7 )

I am not an antivaxxer but I do not see why the whole population should be vaccinated.

For the flu, the policy, even here in Japan with the recommendations from the ministry, is to vaccinate people over 65, and people at risk below that age. Youngs and healthy will get natural immunity.

Why not doing the same for the covid vaccine ?

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

I am not an antivaxxer but I do not see why the whole population should be vaccinated.

For the flu, the policy, even here in Japan with the recommendations from the ministry, is to vaccinate people over 65, and people at risk below that age. Youngs and healthy will get natural immunity.

Why not doing the same for the covid vaccine ?

Because of several reasons.

1.- Because the vaccine is still much less risky than the natural infection for any age group. It is still very desirable to vaccinate even if your risk is low, because it becomes lower.

2.- Because vaccination not only reduces the risk of death but also of hospitalization and long lasting (or permanent) problems because of the infection, young people can have also those.

3.- There is no evidence yet that asymptomatic infection produces long lasting immunity as the heavily symptomatic infection and vaccines do, so people may be at risk later if they are not vaccinated and only present asymptomatic infection.

4.- Because letting young people keep the pandemic going elevates the risk of new variants appearing, including those that can escape the immune response from vaccines and the classic strains.

5.- Because there are a lot of people that are at the same time in high risk and also unable to be vaccinated, so interrupting transmission protects everybody also including them.

By the way, the recommendation for the influenza vaccine also includes young people, even children. People of old age are specially vulnerable so the recommendation is stronger, but it is not true that the intention is for young people to develop immunity naturally.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

virusrex works for Pfizer. Take that commenter's words with a grain of salt (and vitamin D and zinc).

This is a very good example of false information that is used by antivaxxers on their "honest discussions". People imagine things that are not even relevant to the discussion and use those products of their imagination as arguments when they are not even true. There is nothing of value lost if you discard that kind of invalid discussion.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

1.- Because the vaccine is still much less risky than the natural infection for any age group. It is still very desirable to vaccinate even if your risk is low, because it becomes lower.

Yeah, according to those who follow different standards for evaluating the cause of illness or death.

2.- Because vaccination not only reduces the risk of death but also of hospitalization and long lasting (or permanent) problems because of the infection, young people can have also those.

Except when the vaccination causes hospitalization and long lasting (or permanent) problems.

3.- There is no evidence yet that asymptomatic infection produces long lasting immunity as the heavily symptomatic infection and vaccines do, so people may be at risk later if they are not vaccinated and only present asymptomatic infection.

Any evidence they don't have long lasting immunity? Plus, if they were asymptomatic, they can handle the infection.

4.- Because letting young people keep the pandemic going elevates the risk of new variants appearing, including those that can escape the immune response from vaccines and the classic strains.

The best thing to do to reduce the appearance of new variants is to stop using Remdesivir, a mutagen that has been known to increase the appearance of coronavirus variants for 3 years.

5.- Because there are a lot of people that are at the same time in high risk and also unable to be vaccinated, so interrupting transmission protects everybody also including them.

That is why many, including myself, have been insisting for almost a year that the best approach is protect the vulnerable and let everyone else go about normally (while following certain preventative measures (vitamin D, zinc...)) to reach herd immunity.

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

Yeah, according to those who follow different standards for evaluating the cause of illness or death.

No, only one standard, which is to see if something causes more problems than in the general population or not.

Except when the vaccination causes hospitalization and long lasting (or permanent) problems.

False, that is included, for these vaccines there is no evidence yet that it causes hospitalization or permanent problems when vaccinated people are compared with non-vaccinated people. The risk is still much lower.

Any evidence they don't have long lasting immunity? Plus, if they were asymptomatic, they can handle the infection.

Saying that there is no evidence of something is the argument, having evidence of the contrary is another thing, and that would allow to say that those people are in higher risk of a further infection, not that they may be.

The best thing to do to reduce the appearance of new variants is to stop using Remdesivir, a mutagen that has been known to increase the appearance of coronavirus variants for 3 years.

No, that is a false argument without basis, the appearance of variants have been correlated with patients suffering from immune problems in the middle of widespread infection, not to the use of any drug. Pulling explanations without scientific basis out of thin air is not valid.

That is why many, including myself, have been insisting for almost a year that the best approach is protect the vulnerable and let everyone else go about normally (while following certain preventative measures (vitamin D, zinc...)) to reach herd immunity.

And the opinion of the experts is that your suggestion is not useful, because letting everyone go out normally makes impossible to isolate the vulnerable people thanks to the high incidence of asymptomatic carriers, no matte what preventive measures are followed.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

"As vaccine rollouts commence, higher numbers of people in all countries say they would take the vaccine," the study said.

Just read about one case yesterday and now a 2nd case of anaphylaxis in Japan may put a damper on the things once it hits the news. Previously no guidance on epipens. Now? They are required along with observation in case of anaphylaxis. Thank goodness they survived otherwise it would be classified as a "COVID" infection "that they may have been exposed to".

"Anaphylactic shock occurred in a woman in her 20s and 30s. Half an hour after the injection she developed a cough, fever, a drop in blood pressure, difficulty breathing, and itching. The woman was given medication, after which these symptoms subsided.

The Ministry of Health of Japan stressed that the patient’s medical records did not list any medical conditions that could have caused an allergic reaction and suggested that the anaphylaxis could be related to the vaccine.

The first case of anaphylactic shock following vaccination with a Pfizer drug was reported in Japan on March 5. At that time, an allergic reaction occurred in a woman suffering from asthma."

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Just read about one case yesterday and now a 2nd case of anaphylaxis in Japan may put a damper on the things once it hits the news.

The same as the daily occurrence of anaphylaxis in Japan make people do not eat anything, or have surgeries or take antibiotics? no, that is not rational. This is still in the expected incidence and the expected result of immunizing large number of people.

There is no reason to even think people uninfected could be counted as a COVID patient, that is only an excuse antivaxxer propaganda likes to use to avoid accepting that COVID is a very lethal disease so it can actually kill people when an outbreak happens in vulnerable population before their vaccinations had time to improve their chances.

People with immune problems (like asthma) know they have to be careful not only when trying new drugs but also when using new cosmetics, foods, supplements, etc. This is not something that only happens with vaccines.

One very positive thing is that the people that are irrationally against vaccines are running out of actual unexpected problems that supposedly were going to happen to everybody because of the vaccines and have to try and blow out of proportion the expected exceptional cases that are easily treated, this is a very clear proof of the safety of vaccines.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine is on the rise compared to last year, a survey of six industrialized countries published on Monday showed.

Vaccine rollout hits snag as health workers balk at shots

https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-vaccine-health-workers-676e03a99badfd5ce3a6cfafe383f6af

*"*More than three weeks into the campaign, some places are seeing as much as 80% of the staff holding back.

*“I don’t think anyone wants to be a guinea pig,” said Dr. Stephen Noble, a 42-year-old cardiothoracic surgeon in Portland, Oregon, who is postponing getting vaccinated. “At the end of the day, as a man of science, I just want to see what the data show. And give me the full data.”*

Alarmed by the phenomenon, some administrators have dangled everything from free breakfasts at Waffle House to a raffle for a car to get employees to roll up their sleeves. Some states have threatened to let other people cut ahead of health care workers in the line for shots."

Medical professionals are not all on the same page and understandably so. There are risks involved. Now they are needing to dangle carrots (free breakfasts anyone?) in front of them to get their multiple shots? As much as 80% of medical staff holding back? Wow....they must know something the general population doesn't know...

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

There are many who are provaccines, but just do not see the need for vaccines against Covid19.

Considering the low death rate from Covid19, which is overall 0.5-1 per 1000 if infected people are treated immediately and adequately. That is the overall rate for all ages, and it goes down considerably for younger people. It goes down even further if you take appropriate measures ahead of time (vitamin D....).

There are too many examples of young healthy people feeling sick within 48 hours of vaccination and dying soon after.

There is nothing irrational about not wanting these rushed experimental vaccines for something like Covid19. Unfortunately the provaccine indoctrination has been out in full force for many months now...

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

There are many who are provaccines, but just do not see the need for vaccines against Covid19.

Considering the low death rate from Covid19, which is overall 0.5-1 per 1000 if infected people are treated immediately and adequately. That is the overall rate for all ages, and it goes down considerably for younger people. It goes down even further if you take appropriate measures ahead of time (vitamin D....).

Absolutely agreed. No long term data? ZERO studies on pregnant women and children? No thank you.

RawBeer, have you looked into Ivermectin? Following Dr. Pierre Kory of FLCCC very closely on their research (they take care of the sickest of the sick) on the effectiveness of repurposing Ivermectin for COVID19 cases (they are actually savings lives!) and his thoughts on why it is not being looked at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXh1yflndVE

I honestly believe this entire pandemic can end with Ivermectin (in medical use since 1981). If they made it readily available so many lives of people who are truly at risk (comorbidities) would be saved. Very exciting stuff.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-vaccine-health-workers-676e03a99badfd5ce3a6cfafe383f6af

An article from 2 months ago? why not from January last year? the data on safety and efficacy for the approved vaccines is already available for anybody that wants to see them, and there is no problem detected for neither thing. The good thing about science is that the findings are valid even if people have irrational fears about them. People do not want to vaccinate because they are unable to understand that the risk is lower? its their freedom to be irrational, that does not change the fact that vaccines have demonstrated to be safer than risking the natural infection.

There is not a single professional association of health workers or scientists that have made a declaration against the safety and efficacy of the vaccines in the whole world, small number of people can be wrong, it happens for everything (specially if you have to use old news from when the information was not so easily available) that does not make the scientific data different.

There are many who are provaccines, but just do not see the need for vaccines against Covid19.

People can be irrational, not seeing the point in reducing risk is one of those times. There is no data that have proved less than 1% death rates from identified infected people, and even if the numbers were that low (something impossible, since in the US the over 500,000 deaths would mean there are between 500 million and a billion americans infected...) The lethality rate from the vaccine is much lower, so much that it has not been found to be different from the non-vaccinated population. This is a claim that is terribly easy to prove false.

Absolutely agreed. No long term data? ZERO studies on pregnant women and children? No thank you.

I have already corrected on this but it can be copy-pasted as many times as you put this non-problem. Women and children are NOT to be vaccinated, so there is no need to have studies on them. And since COVID already demonstrated long term and even permanent effects on health the vaccine is still safer in the long term, and it will be until it is related to those problems that COVID already caused.

If you are unable to provide scientific reports and have to rely on videos to "prove" scientific facts that is already a very strong sign the scientific consensus contradicts you.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

People can be irrational, not seeing the point in reducing risk is one of those times.

Indeed, it is completely irrational to not increase one's vitamin D levels and to immediately treat infected people with safe and effective medicines.

There is no data that have proved less than 1% death rates from identified infected people,

I already explained that in Raoult's medical facility, they overall death rate (all ages) is 0.5-1 per 1000. But to get such a low rate, infected people must be treated immediately and adequately. Unfortunately,ause a's influence, man places are not allowed to do this.

and even if the numbers were that low (something impossible, since in the US the over 500,000 deaths would mean there are between 500 million and a billion americans infected...)

Yeah, that does seem odd if you are so naive as to believe that the 500,000 of people who died in the US and allegedly tested positive for Covid were actually killed by the virus.

The lethality rate from the vaccine is much lower,

Not if you follow the same standards for covid deaths and vaccine deaths.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Indeed, it is completely irrational to not increase one's vitamin D levels and to immediately treat infected people with safe and effective medicines

Above normal levels? not at all, no benefit has been demonstrated for it so it is just superstition and irrational adherence to a person that keeps people doing it, not science.

You have never provided a source for the supposed success above every other place in the world, if you cannot demonstrate this it is safe to discard it as something that is not real. Once more just an irrational belief without a basis in reality.

Also, if you think you are more capable of diagnosis patients that the professionals you can prove that and demonstrate them wrong with evidence, else their opinion simply is much more worth of trust than yours.

Not if you follow the same standards for covid deaths and vaccine deaths.

Also completely false, if you compare the incidence of problems in the population with and without the variable (be it immunization or COVID) the results remain opposite, vaccines have no elevation of risk above the normal population, COVID on the other hand is a huge risk, even for young people. The same standard proves vaccines as safe and COVID as lethal.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites