world

Australia administers first COVID-19 vaccines despite anti-vaxxer demonstrations

24 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.

24 Comments
Login to comment

in Germany and Sweden rejected vaccine-in Australia "welcomed"...

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

I wonder why they're protesting

Ignoring their concerns won't make them go away, especially when phase 3 trials are incomplete:

We will track participants in our phase 3 clinical trial for the next two years following their second dose, in order to document the long-term effectiveness and safety of the vaccine.

https://www.pfizer.com/news/hot-topics/the_facts_about_pfizer_and_biontech_s_covid_19_vaccine

If other people want to volunteer on this Russian roulette though feel free

1 ( +10 / -9 )

Yeah, well, I tested positive for the antibodies, so I'm not messing with a needless vaccine.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

Any form of coercion, such as "no jab no job," or "no jab no service," is unethical, immoral and constitutionally questionable. If the public would rather trust conspiracy nuts than the mainstream media, that's because you have only your division-sowing, social-engineering selves to blame.

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

"Australia administers first COVID-19 vaccines despite anti-vaxxer demonstrations"

Australia is also having the same problem with the syringes as Japan is having and yet again the western media says nothing.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

All these vaccines are being thoroughly tested prior to approval from the TGA here, of course like all vaccines there may be side affects but it’s incumbent on us all to educate ourselves on this.

Don’t want the jab? Fine! Stay away from me then and don’t come seeking treatment if you get the virus which could have been prevented with the jab!

@Himari

Perhaps Japan was late getting the vaccines, exactly why I have no idea but in Australia I’d say it was because of our lower numbers, approvals process as well as the fact that other countries were higher up on the priority list.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Ignoring their concerns won't make them go away, especially when phase 3 trials are incomplete

Phase III trials are complete, the results already known and published, that the company chooses to keep the vigilance of the subject do not mean the study is incomplete.

At this point is clear, people that choose to reject immunization are in higher risks than those that are vaccinated. Ignoring concerns that can be proved not to be based in reality is not problematic.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Any form of coercion, such as "no jab no job," or "no jab no service," is unethical, immoral and constitutionally questionable.

There's no coercion. You retain the right to choose, jab or no jab.

With any choice, there are consequences. To choose not to have the jab but to insist that you have the right to work with vulnerable people, e.g. in a nursing home, is unethical, immoral and should be criminally prosecutable.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Australia is also having the same problem with the syringes as Japan is having and yet again the western media says nothing.

What do you mean by "the Western media"? Certainly in Australia the syringe problems are being reported.

And Reuters ("Western media, surely?) has also reported the problems in Europe with the syringes.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/a-sixth-of-australia-s-vaccine-supply-at-risk-due-to-syringe-shortage-20210218-p573sj.html

https://7news.com.au/sunrise/on-the-show/global-syringe-shortage-means-precious-doses-of-covid-19-vaccine-will-be-wasted-c-2194626

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-syringes-idUSKBN29Q2CK

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Australia administers first COVID-19 vaccines despite anti-vaxxer LOSERS demonstrations..

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Any form of coercion, such as "no jab no job," or "no jab no service," is unethical, immoral and constitutionally questionable. 

Wien a private corporation fires, there are rarely constitutional concerns because there is no governmental action.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

“Anti-vaxxer” is a misnomer. They are specifically against the rushed and coercive nature of this covid vaccine. Anti vaxxer refers to those against all vaccines. This is a distinction to be fair.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

If you don’t want it, don’t get it. Simple. No need to hear the same noise about it over and over again.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Anti-vaxxers are dangerous morons that out others at risk due to their ignorance and gullibility.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Wearing clothes with the flag of your own country is cringe and pseudo-patriotism. People from Anglo-Saxon countries are strange.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Polio is mostly eradicated because of vaccines. I will take my chances with the COVID vaccine. More anti-vaxxers means a shorter queue. Go for it.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

@Fanny Green

Polio is mostly eradicated because of vaccines. I will take my chances with the COVID vaccine.

Polio is much more serious than the flu. Will you wear a plaster cast on a paper cut, because plaster casts are good for healing broken limbs? That's your logic.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

The COVID-19 shot isn’t a vaccine like polio or smallpox, instead it uses a technique similar to gene therapy. It’s a shortcut with unknown long term effects. I will not be getting the Trump shot.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

The COVID-19 shot isn’t a vaccine like polio or smallpox, instead it uses a technique similar to gene therapy. It’s a shortcut with unknown long term effects. I will not be getting the Trump shot.

The technology itself has been used on humans for years, so any long term effect specific for it would have been evident already, the technique is not "similar" to gene therapy, it can be used for that purpose, but in this case is not. A weakened virus for example would be much more similar to gene therapy (and less safe), you are free to reject an objectively qualified safe health intervention, but there is no point in pretending is a logical option using mistaken reasons.

Polio is much more serious than the flu. Will you wear a plaster cast on a paper cut, because plaster casts are good for healing broken limbs? That's your logic.

How about a helmet while riding a bike? that is a much more closer analogy. The risks associated with a vaccine are negligible for most of the population.

Anti-vaxxer” is a misnomer. They are specifically against the rushed and coercive nature of this covid vaccine. Anti vaxxer refers to those against all vaccines. This is a distinction to be fair.

Antivaxxer is the person that reject vaccines without a valid objective reason, the vaccines have been approved with clinical trials of the same length as previous vaccines that gave no problems of safety and efficacy, and the experts of the world agree it was adequate to qualify the vaccines as safe, people without any evidence rejecting them for nebulous fears (and ignoring the much more tangible risks of the COVID infection) can be qualified as antivaxxers for this reason.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The technology itself has been used on humans for years, so any long term effect specific for it would have been evident already,

How many people received previous versions? I bet it's much so much fewer than the number of people who have so fa received the current vaccines.

the technique is not "similar" to gene therapy, it can be used for that purpose, but in this case is not.

It can be used for gene therapy because it is similar. As you already know, some countries actually consider it to be gene therapy. I don't know whether Australia also officially consider these vaccines as gene therapy. You could argue whether that is a valid classification, but you can't deny that they are at least similar.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Antivaxxer is the person that reject vaccines without a valid objective reason

The so called "antivaxxers" have many valid points, which unfortunately are never discussed honestly in the MSM and are getting increasingly censored on social media.

But in the case of Covid19, there are very many provaxxers that are opposed to the current vaccines for at least 2 reasons:

Covid19 has a very low mortality rate (i.e., even they were effective and relatively safe, they are not needed).

Testing of these experimental vaccines has been rushed and the long term effects are unknown.

Almost 22 percent of Australians said they were unlikely to get the jab, with vaccine hesitancy rising in recent months,

That's quite a low number. I suspect the number would be much higher if they were better informed...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The so called "antivaxxers" have many valid points, which unfortunately are never discussed honestly in the MSM and are getting increasingly censored on social media.

Then do your part to help us understand and post links to articles that demonstrate anti-vaxxers’ “valid points.”

Don’t be coy. Help stick it to the MSM and liberal owned social media.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

How many people received previous versions? I bet it's much so much fewer than the number of people who have so fa received the current vaccines.

Literally hundreds of human trials have used the technology, that is much more than enough to identify any kind of problems specific for the technology. It is not new except for people that don't follow health news.

It can be used for gene therapy because it is similar. As you already know, some countries actually consider it to be gene therapy. I don't know whether Australia also officially consider these vaccines as gene therapy. You could argue whether that is a valid classification, but you can't deny that they are at least similar.

It is not similar, it is considered this way in some countries (not in the US, not in Japan) for control purposes, but a natural virus is much more similar to a gene therapy than mRNA since it involves replication. Are all the attenauted vaccines "gene therapy" for you?

These two are arguments that can be easily demonstrated as mistaken, which is why anybody that wants to be recognized as rational would not use them after this point.

The so called "antivaxxers" have many valid points, which unfortunately are never discussed honestly in the MSM and are getting increasingly censored on social media.

The people that make valid points are not antivaxxers, they are scientists and doctors, that work constantly to improve vaccine efficacy, people that use arguments that can be demonstrated as false and use them repeatedly are no longer interested in doing this and instead they want to impose their beliefs even after knowing they can be proven false. This is something that is positive to censor, in the same way that people trying to deceive others from their money with scams are censored.

The vaccines approved against COVID represent less risks than the infection, that disprove the false argument of the low risk of the infection. And The testing of the vaccines has been done in the same schedule than other vaccines approved previously that are in use without having problems of safety and efficacy, that disproves the "rushed testing" argument.

Anybody that wants to have an honest discussion and only use valid argument would stop using these as soon as they are proven mistaken.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Anti-vaxxer is the new vegan?

Nothing wrong with being vegan, at all. But no need to tell everyone about it, again and again.

If you don’t want a vaccine, you don’t have to take one. Don’t need going on about it. Looks a little needy.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

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