adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,037 
Likes: 5,155
|
Post by adrianc on Dec 22, 2021 8:32:21 GMT
I think you're missing the point here. Being an alcoholic (for example) isn't contagious and isn't going to bring the NHS crashing down.
Regarding mandatory vaccination, you don't need to strap anyone down, you just need to make life difficult for them. For example if you're not vaccinated:
- you can't live in a council house
- you don't get any government benefits, including pensions
- no job
- no entry to pubs or restaurants
- no use of public transport
- no access to hospitals if you contract the virus
I'm certain that would get their attention another hostile environment. And that just proves that the issue here isn't the concept, it's the detail... It's perfectly politically acceptable to restrict those already... * Access to accommodation - it became a legal requirement for landlords to prove tenants' migration status in 2016. * Access to benefits - many people do not have access to the benefits system because of migration status, and restricting access is used as a punishment for failure to conform with the system's requirements. * Access to work - vaccination status already controls access to some jobs. * Access to pubs and restaurants - facemasks became a requirement as part of pubs and restaurants being allowed to re-open after lockdown. Vaccination status is a requirement for access to nightclubs. * Access to public transport - facemasks became a requirement 18 months ago, with fines for non-compliance. * Access to healthcare - apart from residence being a requirement for free NHS treatment, BMI is used as a gateway for certain treatments, as is alcohol and tobacco consumption.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,037
Likes: 5,155
|
Post by adrianc on Dec 22, 2021 9:42:11 GMT
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,388
Likes: 2,787
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Dec 22, 2021 9:52:37 GMT
Here's another set of graphs of the day www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59747689Some data from a week ago www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/news-events/epidemiological-update-omicron-data-15-decemberThere may be a slight correlation between both sets, weakly implying that those countries where numbers are exploding now may have the omicron wave based on relatively large omicron numbers last week; and those where time-courses look peaked may be in a downward delta phase waiting for omicron. Just a hypothesis. If true it'll most likely soon start to get very bad across all Europe. Timescale of days to a couple of weeks. I think I'll stay home for Christmas. Uk looks like the S has already hit the F (67m inhabitants, 87k cases), as does Denmark (5.8m i., 9k cases). France seems most worrying with deaths rising, Denmark and UK high number of cases, but deaths not rising (yet). Coincidentally (or not) UK and Denmark have high levels of Booster, France not so much. (From Our World in Data)
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,388
Likes: 2,787
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Dec 22, 2021 10:10:23 GMT
Seems to be as effective as vaccination. This may reduce the dilemma of getting or not getting vaccinated for some, and allow those who can't have the vaccine a way out of perpetual lockdown. If it's use is mainly for unvaccinated people at high risk of developing severe illness will huge supplies be required?
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,604
Likes: 2,629
|
Post by keitha on Dec 22, 2021 11:13:32 GMT
another hostile environment. And that just proves that the issue here isn't the concept, it's the detail... It's perfectly politically acceptable to restrict those already... * Access to accommodation - it became a legal requirement for landlords to prove tenants' migration status in 2016. * Access to benefits - many people do not have access to the benefits system because of migration status, and restricting access is used as a punishment for failure to conform with the system's requirements. * Access to work - vaccination status already controls access to some jobs. * Access to pubs and restaurants - facemasks became a requirement as part of pubs and restaurants being allowed to re-open after lockdown. Vaccination status is a requirement for access to nightclubs. * Access to public transport - facemasks became a requirement 18 months ago, with fines for non-compliance. * Access to healthcare - apart from residence being a requirement for free NHS treatment, BMI is used as a gateway for certain treatments, as is alcohol and tobacco consumption. - Seems reasonable to me, if you are here legally then you can live in the community if you came in illegally no Access to benefits - you have to show you are spending your time looking for jobs etc,not watching daytime TV or sitting in the pub, but it can be heartless ! my daughter was threatened with sanctions as she refused to take a job working at night that would leave my granddaughter who was 5 home alone overnight, she was so paranoid she even spent hours job searching on Christmas day, as they monitor how often you log into the job search site and how many jobs you click on. One clever friend has a piece of software that records his clicks, he showed me the other week, he turns PC on and opens the site then fires the software up and runs his recorded routine, it looks like he is active when he isn't. Access to work - this one does worry me as the next one maybe if you lose a job because of vaccination status, will you be refused benefits as it was your fault Access to pubs and restaurants - One worry for me is the NHS COVID APP, basically gives them the right to track you and give your personal information to others , and for us in wales the need to show it to access Cinemas theatres etc is a pain as the thing only lasts 48 hours.
Access to healthcare - I think many of us agree residence should be a requirement for access to FREE treatment, or a reciprocal agreement with the country of origin. We should not be a destination for health tourists. Having said that I got angry at a friend who Moved to Spain for a better life, then came back 10 years later when he developed a life threatening condition. Spent a year here having treatment and once he got the all clear promptly went back to Spain.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,037
Likes: 5,155
|
Post by adrianc on Dec 22, 2021 11:17:22 GMT
Access to healthcare - I think many of us agree residence should be a requirement for access to FREE treatment, or a reciprocal agreement with the country of origin. We should not be a destination for health tourists. Having said that I got angry at a friend who Moved to Spain for a better life, then came back 10 years later when he developed a life threatening condition. Spent a year here having treatment and once he got the all clear promptly went back to Spain. As a non-resident of the UK, he should not have been eligible for NHS treatment. The NHS should have charged him, or recharged his treatment to the Spanish healthcase system via his EHIC card. He was literally the definition of a "health tourist". I bet he viewed himself as an "ex-pat", not an immigrant.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,604
Likes: 2,629
|
Post by keitha on Dec 22, 2021 11:27:18 GMT
he had rented a house here and yes I agree he was a health tourist, but his attitude was and is I paid in for 35 years I'm entitled. first attempt to post produced this :- Attachments:
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,053
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Dec 22, 2021 11:34:37 GMT
And there is also a risk of serious health complications from taking paracetamol, driving a car or crossing the road. However, as with taking the vaccine, the risks are minute so we don't worry about them.
I'm not aware that the risks of taking the vaccine is greater than the risk of contracting covid (for any age group) so I don't think the 'taking one for the team' analogy is appropriate. Do you have a link to data that proves the additional risk?
and you'll find that for certain cohorts it is exactly that. So why should someone take a drug that has a teeny, tiny chance of seriously harming them when it has an even teenier, tinier chance of helping them? its even worse than that though. Initially those cohorts were told there was essentially negligible risk and only later has that been clarified as rare side affects have shown themselves. A typical response from somebody who can't justify their position.
I recall Chris Whitty presenting risk reward information for various age groups taking the vaccine at one of the downing street press conferences. There was a large reward for older people, which reduced with age. However, even the younger age groups had a minor benefit (to themselves, not society at large). There was no age group where taking the vaccine was greater risk than not taking it.
Regarding you earlier comment regarding the dilema that non-vaccinted people face, I don't believe that generally that is the case. There are a small group of people who should not be vaccinated because of health reason. There are also small groups (such as pregnant women) where there may be some dilema. However, for the overwhelming majority of non-vaccinated people it is just a lifestyle choice. What dilema did Piers Corbyn face before deciding not to get vaccinted?
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,604
Likes: 2,629
|
Post by keitha on Dec 22, 2021 11:47:39 GMT
What dilemma did Piers Corbyn face before deciding not to get vaccinated?
He just wants to be infamous like Jeremy Why is it people called Piers tend to be idiots ( Apologies to anyone called Piers here )
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,604
Likes: 2,629
|
Post by keitha on Dec 22, 2021 11:57:54 GMT
On compulsory vaccination why don't we acknowledge a moral dilemma (which is in addition to "freedom of choice" made earlier). There is a risk of serious health complications from the currently approved vaccines. For healthy, young people that risk may be higher than the risk of serious harm to health from the virus. So why don't we make it clear, that in those cases we are asking those people to sacrifice their own health (risk of ill-health) for the sake of the wider population? And there is also a risk of serious health complications from taking paracetamol, driving a car or crossing the road. However, as with taking the vaccine, the risks are minute so we don't worry about them.
I'm not aware that the risks of taking the vaccine is greater than the risk of contracting Covid (for any age group) so I don't think the 'taking one for the team' analogy is appropriate. Do you have a link to data that proves the additional risk?
I'm 62, had Moderna as Booster almost exactly 4 weeks ago, within 36 hours I was in severe pain in Knee and Elbow joints, they are still painful to fully extend now, I still have a noticeable hard lump at the injection site and pain running from that to my neck. I've done a yellow form as has my GP and he says its a known set of side effects. All I've been told is "only drink clear fluids" and "take paracetamol or co-codamol" and the best bit " THE SYMPTOMS MAY CLEAR UP IN A MONTH OR 2" Had i know this was a possible side effect I would have had something other than Moderna, and I'm definitely wary of having a further booster
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,715
Likes: 2,986
|
Post by michaelc on Dec 22, 2021 12:52:22 GMT
Do your own research and you'll find that for certain cohorts it is exactly that. So why should someone take a drug that has a teeny, tiny chance of seriously harming them when it has an even teenier, tinier chance of helping them? its even worse than that though. Initially those cohorts were told there was essentially negligible risk and only later has that been clarified as rare side affects have shown themselves. A typical response from somebody who can't justify their position.
I recall Chris Whitty presenting risk reward information for various age groups taking the vaccine at one of the downing street press conferences. There was a large reward for older people, which reduced with age. However, even the younger age groups had a minor benefit (to themselves, not society at large). There was no age group where taking the vaccine was greater risk than not taking it.
Regarding you earlier comment regarding the dilema that non-vaccinted people face, I don't believe that generally that is the case. There are a small group of people who should not be vaccinated because of health reason. There are also small groups (such as pregnant women) where there may be some dilema. However, for the overwhelming majority of non-vaccinated people it is just a lifestyle choice. What dilema did Piers Corbyn face before deciding not to get vaccinted?
Yes I admit I'm lazy but fired up Google. How about this: www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2957/rr-1
For young age groups, in whom covid-related morbidity and mortality is low, and for those who have had covid 19 infection already, and appear to have longstanding immunological memory, the harms of taking a vaccine are almost certain to outweigh the benefits to the individual, and the goal of reducing transmission to other people at higher risk has not been demonstrated securely.What stuck in my mind was many of our EU neighbours initially restricting certain vaccines to older people only precisely because of this risk/reward equation. I'm sorry but the older people get the more they want the younger to get vaccinated (for selfish reasons) which is probably why these arguments go down badly here. I will be getting my booster. If I was 16, I'd be thinking about it a bit more.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,715
Likes: 2,986
|
Post by michaelc on Dec 22, 2021 12:53:31 GMT
Do your own research and you'll find that for certain cohorts it is exactly that. So why should someone take a drug that has a teeny, tiny chance of seriously harming them when it has an even teenier, tinier chance of helping them? its even worse than that though. Initially those cohorts were told there was essentially negligible risk and only later has that been clarified as rare side affects have shown themselves.
If you are referring to the UK, then back that up with actual historical information and data. The UK has been one of the most cautious when it comes to offering vaccination to the youngest age groups. It has been behind pretty much everywhere in offering it to the 17+, 15-17 age, 12+ cohorts. And even now the UK is not administering to <12 yr old, when other countries are. In fact when it was finally offered to 12-15 cohort, I think the JCVI stayed neutral in its advice, stating that the health gain was there but too small, but recognising that the govt. might want to take into account other impacts (particularly educational loss/disruption impacts due to isolation). [for information the link to their statement is here: www.gov.uk/government/publications/jcvi-statement-september-2021-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-aged-12-to-15-years/jcvi-statement-on-covid-19-vaccination-of-children-aged-12-to-15-years-3-september-2021] I think that is a sign that the MHRA and JCVI have very carefully considered the balance of risks and benefits to individuals, and have waited for more data to emerge on side effects on the young, (and this is an assertion rather than one I can immediately point my finger at, but as I recall some side effects such as heart inflammation have turned out to be less serious/common than initially reported). Something that it is impossible to deny - except if one is a conspiracy theorist, or a Russian/Chinese internet disinformation provocateur - is this is the most closely monitored rollout of any pharmacological medical intervention in history, with every country in the world involved, with every medical regulatory authority involved, with the greatest ever real time sharing of information across geographic and scientific boundaries, and with all the power of modern computer technology/big data/data science brought to the fight. It is of course also rather blindingly obvious that if one were to support 'mandation' (in whatever form) that doesn't have to mean all population cohorts. Resorting essentially to name calling. Oh dear .... Edit: And just to add that shutting out any kind of debate is exactly what is peeing a lot of people off and far worse may end up with the wrong choices (when those people are top level scientists)
|
|
|
|
Post by stevepn on Dec 22, 2021 13:05:16 GMT
1
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Dec 22, 2021 14:23:49 GMT
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,636
Likes: 1,742
|
Post by benaj on Dec 22, 2021 14:33:37 GMT
We can only hope people 85+ can recover from the life saving pill if there are any, hopefully extending life hour by hour.
|
|
