Most people who are unwilling to be vaccinated against Covid are concerned about side effects and question whether the vaccines have been fully tested, according to a new survey in 15 countries. The Guardian has more.
Other reasons cited in the survey of 68,000 people, led by Imperial College London’s Institute of Global Health Innovation in collaboration with YouGov, were the uncertainty that people would not get the vaccine they preferred and worries about efficacy.
The survey was carried out in Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Excluding eligibility, the top reasons for not having the vaccine across all 15 countries surveyed were “concerns about side effects” and/or “concerns that there has not been enough testing of vaccines”.
Trust in vaccines was highest in the U.K., at 87%, and lowest in Japan, at 47%. The U.K. respondents also had the highest level of confidence in their health authorities (70%), while South Korea had the lowest (42%).
Among those who had not yet been vaccinated, confidence was highest in the Pfizer vaccine in nine out of the 15 countries, and in three others – Canada, Singapore and Sweden – among those under 65.
The U.S. had the largest number of people across all ages saying they did not trust any of the Covid vaccines. The survey, which has been running since last year, found that until March the AstraZeneca vaccine was the most trusted in the U.K. among the under-65s, but confidence in it has declined in all age groups with the publicity over side effects. In most other countries, trust in AstraZeneca is low, as with Russia’s Sputnik V and China’s Sinopharm vaccines.
These findings echo those of another survey recently conducted by the E.U. agency Eurofound which suggested that more than a quarter of adults in the E.U. are either “very unlikely” or “rather unlikely” to accept a Covid vaccine. The main reason cited by participants was a lack of trust in the safety of the vaccine. Almost half of those who were unlikely to accept a Covid vaccine said the risks associated with the virus has been exaggerated and eight per cent believed that Covid didn’t exist at all.
The Guardian report is worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
If you go to the corrupt liars at yougov they say that more than 75% want a tougher “singapore” style lock down next time and that 99.9% are going to have their wonderful “shot”.
Turn off the news and avoid our “nhs” if you want to stay healthy !
The NHS:
Liverpool “Care Pathway” on a national scale.
Which is no longer allowed to be used…. So they say….
the name isn’t, but the nudge towards death is.
And we are now complaining that the huge backlog of patients that we created, is threatening to overwhelm the sainted NHS once again.
A friend had her second injection earlier this week. The first one was organised by the army and was seamless. This time it was the NHS and there was an hour and a half wait in a queue in a heatwave. Inside, the staff had to have drinks of water, breaks, lunch etc. Chaos and exhaustion for the punters.
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/06/03/we-need-to-talk-about-midazolam/
Now The NHS want’s to sell our data I feel like it’ll be a constant battle to keep it private, one day I’ll fail to spot a sneaky opt out. I’m at the point where I want my records removed completely, destroyed and have nothing to do with the NHS again. I understand however that this isn’t possible??
In my younger days when the NHS GPs used to ask “do you smoke” I’d say put me down as a no. They would look quizzically at me and I’d say “I don’t want that recorded as a yes or one day in the future (many years after I’ve stopped being foolish and reckless) I’ll probably be denied life saving treatment”. “Oh that’ll never happen!”, I suppose you won’t sell my private medical data either, or declare me mentally unfit to refuse the covid jab because I was unhappy once 20 years ago…
I opted “out” of this for what good it might do. Apparently, if you want to be double sure that they will actually “opt” you out , you have to film yourself physically delivering a handwritten “opt out” to the surgery itself as proof.
Mentally and physically..
It’s vital that leaders listen to these concerns and address them with urgency so that more people will be willing to accept these life-saving vaccines.”
So if I end up with life changing side effects and medication which I have to take for the rest of my life I’m supposed to feel grateful I’m still alive. I don’t think so.
“Trust in vaccines was highest in the U.K., at 87%,”
More evidence that the average IQ in the UK is lower than in most countries.
Trust in opinion polls run by Imperial College was 100% according to Imperial College.
Nobody points out that the s.d…g ,vaccines’ don’t work, then?
Why are they even worried?
If you dont take the vaccine then you have to accept that the reduction in risk from getting covid wont happen for you. (My guess as to the risk reduction is that it is zero) Covid will now only affect the unvaxxed and none of that group, including myself, can complain if we get it. The vaxxed group will be immune if our politicians are true to their word, so they have nothing to worry about.
If you have made your choice, and everyone else has made their choice as well, why cant we just get on with things as normal?
The only answer to that question that makes any sense is that this isnt about covid, it is about depopulation.
And the vaccine passport. Control the population via the id passports while reducing numbers with the vaccine.
I’m 72 and refuse to be jabbed with an experimental compound whose efficacy is debatable whilst it’s (sometimes lethal) side effects are manifest. An interesting topic:– the numbers surrounding relative risk v absolute risk with a ‘vaccine’ of circa 90% effectiveness.The difference regarding risk of infection between jabbed and unjabbed is circa 0.8%, meaning you need to inject approx 130 folk to ‘avoid’ one infection. Doesn’t seem like a good trade off to me!
I’m your age and, having survived covid, prefer to rely on my naturally-acquired immunity in the shape of the T-cells now resident in my bone marrow, always on full alert for the whiff of virus, whereupon an army of leucocytes and killer lymphocytes (new antibodies) will immediately surround and marmelise the invader. With no side-effects, either!
These figures suggest that “vaccine hesitancy” isn’t confined solely to cranks, “anti-vaxxers” or “covid deniers” or other groups, denominated by similar epithets. Perfectly normal people have serious reservations about these novel “vaccines”. In the UK, it appears likely that every time the “golden vaccination key to unlocking” is downgraded or repudiated by government and/or its “advisers”, or called into question by the handy appearance of variants, and any moves delayed, faith or trust in the stuff for that particular purpose will wane.
I don’t want to be injected with non-organic gene therapy for a corona virus that has a 99.8% chance of survival and most instances doesn’t make you sick.
I’m not sure that’s a good enough argument to use. 99.8 survival rate would mean that 2 out of every 1000 would die, and that is a good enough argument, for most people, to justify the vax. I think it’s better to use the argument that for a relatively heathy person the survival rate is 99.98% (or whatever the exact number is).
Yes I was accidentally generous with that figure. Also the reality is of those 0.02%, most, if not all, died of something else but tested positive with the dodgy equipment.
I don’t get a lot of time to write these comments so I’m notoriously bad at making the odd mistake!
Let us also not forget the age adjusted death rate. The vaxx is killing people at a much younger age than covid. The potential amount of life left is a much better measure, though admittedly a more difficult statistic to calculate and understand.
Yes, the NHS and NICE use that to make assessments of the benefits of medical drugs and procedures. They have to because of limited resources (resources will always be limited to some figure or other). Here’s the NICE definition: Quality-adjusted life year A measure of the state of health of a person or group in which the benefits, in terms of length of life, are adjusted to reflect the quality of life. One quality-adjusted life year (QALY) is equal to 1 year of life in perfect health. QALYs are calculated by estimating the years of life remaining for a patient following a particular treatment or intervention and weighting each year with a quality-of-life score (on a 0 to 1 scale). It is often measured in terms of the person’s ability to carry out the activities of daily life, and freedom from pain and mental disturbance. For once I find myself in agreement with the health authorities. My concern though is that I have never heard Vallance, Whitty, Hancock, Johnson, NHS or PHE use this QALY analysis in relation to Covid vaccines (or even Covid itself). If it were, then I doubt medical professionals should be recommending any person under 60… Read more »
… or anybody, actually.
I’d prefer to give Ivermectin a go – anytime.
Also the younger you are the more likely you are to be harmed by long term effects of vaccines.
Or for a healthy person under 40 – 99.999%. But then you are into Toby Territory: I am doing this for the community at large and so we can get out of lockdown will come the reply.
But are you?
Personally I prefer to start from the premise that there is no evidence any good will come of using whole population mass vaccination to tackle respiratory viruses.
As the pseudo “vaccine” does not stop spread, it’s only claim is of milder symptoms…
So it seems the only benefit for widespread use of the jabs is profits for pharma title holders.
Milder, as defined by the Big Pharma companies. They use all sorts of Covid scams.
Where are you getting the 99.8% figure from? This metastudy of 24 different assessments suggests an infection fatality rate of 0.68% which would give a survival rate of 99.3%.
The disparity probably comes from the weakest being “culled” early on. As the years go by the survival rate will get closer to the 0.68%.
So – where did the 99.8% figure come from? What source?
All irrelevant when the real world risk reduction from being jabbed is around 1% – before the risk enhancement is accounted for.!
Professor Dr John Ioannidis is arguably the world’s number one Epidemiologist and Data Scientist. His career could not be more distinguished. His list of “Honours & Awards” and his entire Stanford profile goes a long way to demonstrating this. See below for link and details. Professor Ioannidis has published several papers during Covid19, confirming that the mortality rate or Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) of Covid19 is no greater than a common flu, and actually under 70s are more likely to die of influenza than Covid19. Global perspective of COVID-19 epidemiology for a full-cycle pandemic https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/eci.13423 “Global infection fatality rate is 0.15-0.20% (0.03-0.04% in those <70 years)” This equates to a 99.85% survival rate overall, and a 99.97% survival rate in the under 70s from NATURAL IMMUNITY. Natural immunity is far superior to specific immunity to the Wuhan spike protein, which is all you get from this crap, plus natural immunity should last a lifetime and does not have the undesirable effect of bullying other parts of the immune system (specific antibodies bullying non-specific antibodies) out of doing their job, which is another fear that has ben raised by a top level vaccine specialist who is sounding the alarm, Geert Vanden… Read more »
John P.A. Ioannidis https://profiles.stanford.edu/john-ioannidis Professor of Medicine (Stanford Prevention Research), of Epidemiology and Population Health and by courtesy, of Statistics and of Biomedical Data Science Honours & Awards Albert Stuyvenberg Medal, European Society for Clinical Investigation (2021) Elected corresponding member, Accademia delle Scienze (Bologna) (2021) Haldane lecture, Wolfson College, Oxford University (2021) J Arliss Pollock Award and Memorial Lecture, American Society of Neuroradiology (2021) Morris/Paffenbarger Exercise is Medicine® Keynote Lecture, American College of Sports Medicine (2021) Roy and Diana Vagelos inaugural lecture, World Hellenic Biomedical Association (2021) Honorary doctorate, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (2020 (award ceremony 2021)) Honorary doctorate (medicine), University of Edinburgh (2019 (award ceremony 2021)) C.R. Stephen lecture, Washington University St. Louis (2019) Gordon Award, National Institutes of Health (2019) Honorary PhD, University of Tilburg (2019) Honorary President, Medical and Surgical Society of Corfu (2019) Elected member, National Academy of Medicine (2018-) David and Rosemary Adamson Lecture on Excellence in Reproductive Medicine, ASRM (2018) Einstein fellow, Berlin Institute of Health, Einstein Stiftung and Stiftung Charite (2018) Epiphany Science Courage Award, Novim (inaugural award) (2018) Gonatas memorial lectureship, University of Pennsylvania (2018) Elected Councilor, Association of American Physicians (2017-2022) Annual Distinguished Investigator, University of Connecticut School of Medicine and… Read more »
Here is an account of how the measures they introduced for Covid had the effect of killing thousands of people who would have otherwise survived. All these people would of course been classed as Covid deaths, as opposed to victims of criminal medical interventions. The Chinese Communist Party’s Global Lockdown Fraud https://ccpgloballockdownfraud.medium.com/the-chinese-communist-partys-global-lockdown-fraud-88e1a7286c2b 3. Deadly Recommendations for Early Mechanical Ventilation Came from China In early March 2020, the WHO released COVID-19 provider guidance documents to healthcare workers. The guidance recommended escalating quickly to mechanical ventilation as an early intervention for treating COVID-19 patients, a departure from past experience during respiratory-virus epidemics. In doing so, they cited the guidance being presented by Chinese journal articles, which published papers in January and February claiming that “Chinese expert consensus” called for “invasive mechanical ventilation” as the “first choice” for people with moderate to severe respiratory distress, in part to protect medical staff. As the Wall Street Journal later reported: Last spring, doctors put patients on ventilators partly to limit contagion at a time when it was less clear how the virus spread, when protective masks and gowns were in short supply. Doctors could have employed other kinds of breathing support devices that don’t… Read more »
Here is the article stating that these injections could theoretically cause cancer.
‘Healthy People Do Not Require Genetic Vaccination’
https://cassandravoices.com/science-environment/science/healthy-people-do-not-require-genetic-vaccination/
Here is Geert Vanden Bossche explaining how the specific antibodies could bully out the innate immune system’s non-specific antibodies which would have disastrous consequences for the vaccinated.
Professional says – stop Vaccination – Geert Vanden Bossche
https://www.bitchute.com/video/wcD9JsxNvNxD/
Here is highly qualified British Physician Dr Roger Hodkinson in a brilliant new interview highlighting a whole range of absurdities of the criminal Covid19 agenda and the reckless population-wide gene based injection rollout.
Dr. Hodkinson Interview – COVID-19 Vaccines, Infertility & Spike Protein Dangers
https://odysee.com/@TLAVagabond:5/Dr-Hodkinson-Interview-COVID-19-Vaccines-Infertility-Spike-Protein-Dangers:9
All excellent stuff, thank you
So stick that into your injection site, MTF
I agree with all that. The other difficulty is the loss of face that much of the profession will suffer, or more to the point, the loss of confidence and reputation w.r.t. to other (real) health problems, and the aftermath of the loss of service to the general public.
I am not hesitant at all, my decision is not to have one. “Hesitancy” implies weak, indecisive, open to persuasion, ie that the hesitant are somehow deficient in their assessment and of lesser intelligence. I suggest the use of that term arises from the behavioural insights mob.
… and, of course, to claim that the vaccines are ‘safe’ is to display scientific illiteracy.
Yes – very true Rick! Even the government, NHS and PHE have abandoned the usage of “safe” and now use the language of “balance of risks and benefits” which they always try and pitch at the communal rather than individual level because of course they don’t people to undertake an individual risk assessment.
The problem with this and something the article doesn’t really go into, is that they don’t provide any clear data on the risks from vaccination, apart from a sore arm, weakness etc.
I note however that MHRA are back using the “safe” word.
Yes, “hesitancy” is another word from the lexicon of vaxopropaganda. Call it “caution” or if you were being honest “realism”.
“Do you want to be vaccinated?” Possible answers are yes or no.
“Do you want to be protected?” Instant confusion, as the answer cannot start with no, and once you FEEL confused it takes a lot of effort to counter.
Yes, excellent observation.
It forces you to affirm their position, as you automatically start “Yes but…”. However, once you start “seeing” these little tricks, they become visible everywhere.
The other classic is “there is no evidence to suggest…”, which the uninitiated take to mean someone did an experiment, but actually means no-one has ever bothered to investigate (probably because the results might not support the preferred outcome).
Yes “no evidence to suggest” is a classic. Or “studies suggest that x,y.z”. True, three studies (paid for by interested parties) do but four more objective studies don’t and the MSM don’t mention the four opposing studies. And of course when the MSM like someone they are introduced as being from “the respected” think tank, institute or whatever.
These tricks are indeed used in many contexts. Category shifting is another favourite – shifting for instance from “equality of opportunity” to “equality of outcome” to “enforced equality” but never admitting that’s what you’ve done. Likewise from “free speech” to “opposing hate speech” to “limiting free speech”. The people proposing limiting free speech still claim they support free speech.
Yes, they laid out all the tricks in “Yes, Minister”. Things don’t change much. There will always be manipulative so and so’s climbing the greasy pole.
The answer is “yes, from death and serious illness….I want to minimise risk of both. In this instance, this does not necessarily mean taking the vaccine”
Obvious answer – “protected from what and by what”?
I’m not hesitant, I’m adamant – I’m not being injected.
Why does Lockdown Sceptics always use the lexicon of vaxopropaganda?
“Unwilling” is a loaded word suggesting a degree of wilful “disobedience”. A more neutral way of expressing this would be to say “Most people choosing not to have the vaccine do so because they are concerned about known or potential side effects.”
Obviously that could be put even more forecfully from a vaxosceptic point of view, but that would be a reasonably neutral way of expressing the situation. Instead the ATL writers constantly use the vaxopropagandist frame of reference.
Because they too have been partially reprogrammed and are unaware of it. Emotional language is used to get you to comply, so that use of force can be avoided.
As people realize that there are safe alternatives to a vaccine the number will drop even further.
Ultimately, refusal to get jabbed comes from the fact that no one, not even the vaccine makers, can predict the long term consequences on human health of this experimental vaccine. We are the laboratory rats. Those who understand this simple fact are perhaps a minority in countries like the UK, but this doesn’t make the fact less true.
It’s also true that some people, rather like the vaccine manufacturers themselves, are aware that the vaccines don’t prevent infection with or transmission of the not yet proven to exist Sars-Cov-2 coronavirus. This consideration will tie in for many with the point you make about the unknown long term consequences of these gene altering products.
In the absence of proper safety information, I think it is safer to assume that the longer term consequences of all of the Covid vaccines will be incapacitating and painful illness leading inevitably to premature death.
not yet proven to exist Sars-Cov-2 coronavirus.
That would the same virus that most people on this forum seemed to think escaped from a Chinese lab? Difficult to accuse them of letting a non-existent virus escape!
Trust in vaccines at 87% in the UK! If true it shows just how stupid the British people are.
I do not believe this for an instant. As time goes by and more and more ‘side effects’ – such as premature death or disabilty begin to appear, that pc will drop anyway. The sad thing is that many of those who’ll say they have no trust will already have been vaccinated, and their newly-acquired wisdom arrived too late for them.
Department of the Bleedin’ Obvious…
Paid for by you and me through tax-sourced grants to Imperial College.
And Bill Gates.
Oh yes I forgot “The Philanthropist”.
Encouraging. I wonder will those numbers of vaccinated drop further when boosters are rolled out? The 25% who have declined, are very unlikely now to shift. Given they’ve been proven 100% correct in their scepticism
Not if there’s a Digital Compliance ID system which prevents the unvaccinated from travelling abroad, going to the cinema, attending sports events or the theatre, getting medical treatment more easily etc etc. If the Digital ID is an “open system” ie it can be used by the private sector to check your status you may find Facebook and other woke organisations start demanding it. People on the Digital ID will received frequent reminders that their booster is due and that failure attend will mean loss of their “clear” status. All sorts of horrors lie ahead unless we manage to stop this Digital Compliance ID being put in place.
“question whether the vaccines have been fully tested”. It’s not a question – they haven’t.
But it’s not a ‘vaccine’ is it. It’s an experimental gene treatment, for which the manufacturers will bear no liability for side-effects or death (1,000+ and counting). This is turning into one massive IQ test.
I’m 99% sure I have had the virus already (had it back in February 2020 just before the media hysteria and lockdowns) although not the flu the the symptoms were defintely flu-like – so I treated it as you would the flu – stayed home, plenty of rest, took paracetamol for the bodyaches and the sweaty high fever and let my immune system do the rest, not much I could do about the persistent coughing though – anyway the main symtoms I suffered for a day or two but it all gradually waned and it was all over within a week or so and I was back to normal. I have not had any similar symptoms of anything else since – not a sniffly cold or anything covid-like since … absolutely nothing – I’ve not worn a mask and have carried on pretty much as normal. I know of people who have followed the mask-wearing, the social-distancing, the hand washing and still they have had the same flu-like symptoms like myself last year and they actually tested positive for the coronavirus (as it was known then) – once diagnosed they were told to stay at home, rest, take paracetamol –… Read more »
That sounds a very similar story to mine. The only difference being I dealt with it by dosing-up on Lemsip. That was it, nothing else. I concluded at the time it was just a heavy bout of flu, then the official Covid narrative came into being…
I think many more people are getting some very bad clotting and/or low platelet count side effects of the spike protein (maker) injections.
The AZ ones will be sharpest but the RNA spike makers will have the worst effects long term.
As has been pointed out – many of the less dramatic side-effects are also consistent with clotting.
I had a couple of viral infections – ‘colds’ – that had identical symptoms to the amorphous SARS-CoV-2 in the two years before 2020.
The persistent, long-lasting and persistent cough was particularly distinctive. I know others had the same.
Reel forward three years, and severe reactions after choosing the jab are much more common than any such infections. Work that one out … it’s not difficult, is it?
If Australians and New Zealanders were anti-vax because they were anti-immigration and wanted the borders to stay sealed, wouldn’t they claim “fear of side effects” rather than admitting to their true motivation?
UH????????????????????????????????????????/
What I’m saying is that a “Zero Covid” policy is a great way for a government to ban immigration without being accused of racism.
I don’t see any evidence that immigration is a key issue in this.
“…and eight per cent believed that Covid didn’t exist at all.” Conflates SARS-CoV-2 virus and Covid disease. Do they believe that the disease doesn’t exist or the virus?
Although I subscribe to most of the usual health and cost/benefit objections to giving an experimental therapy to billions of healthy people who have no need of it, my main objection to having the “vaccine” is more of a political/moral one that I’ve not heard other sceptics articulate; namely, that the vaccine is being sold to the public as the only “way out” of the anti-scientific, authoritarian and immoral lockdowns, mask mandating etc and to me this feels like an old fashioned gangster protection racket: some thug with more muscle than me serves me up a bogus “problem” then offers me a way out by buying his “insurance”. It’s an outrage! When the first lockdown was announced my immediate reaction was that “if” the virus is as universally dangerous and transmissible as the government claimed (Ferguson model) and if significantly above average mortality in any age group is not tolerable, then there is literally no way out of lockdowns until a cure or vaccine is discovered or herd immunity is allowed to all too slowly (because of lockdown) establish itself, and that is simply not sustainable as that could take years. So, “in principle”, waiting for the medicine while we lockdown… Read more »
I don’t think that aspect has been forgotten – it’s just that there are so many objections to the whole scenario.
I agree with you entirely and have been saying the same thing since March last year. The trouble is nobody will listen.
It’s the attitude of my local MP, based on his reply to me on the subject. He believes (or at least believed) in vaccination as a ‘get out of jail’ tactic. That’s about it.
Hesitancy implies that at some point an individual will succumb.
I am hesitant as I am waiting for evidence that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risk, for me personally. I think that it is possible that this may be the case in around 2050 something when I am in my 80s. If we still have SARS CoV 2 circulating.
I will happily reconsider at that point.
No hesitancy, just no outright!
‘Reasonable concern’ might be better than ’fear’ in the headline; after all, this isn’t the SUN. It may well be that reality is panning out along the lines of the ONS surgery back in the winter, if not too many same people have changed their point of view. I haven’t changed my position yet; far from it. My own view is that it was wise to say ‘no’ at the time, given the emerging results.
“Hesitancy” just doesn’t cut it. I’m not hesitating, I’m NEVER injecting that cocktail of Christ knows what, whichever Big Pharma corporation made it!
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2021/06/03/covid19-the-spike-protein-and-blood-clotting/#comments
https://trialsitenews.com/the-covid-19-spike-protein-may-be-a-potentially-unsafe-toxic-endothelial-pathogen/
“The spike which keeps on spiking”