CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 11)
Discussion
CAH706 said:
Nickgnome said:
Did I misread the article.
I see NHS planning for a potential increase in cases. Very sensible in my opinion.
Where in that article have the government said there will be a lockdown?
You guys need to get a grip.
Best case the trust scenario has is worse than last April.....right. I see NHS planning for a potential increase in cases. Very sensible in my opinion.
Where in that article have the government said there will be a lockdown?
You guys need to get a grip.
It is called planning. It maybe worst case.
The farce of it is the many here who say they do not consider they need a vaccine.
Whether it materialises is completely within the public's control.
Nickgnome said:
So do you accept there is no such Government lockdown in that article?
It is called planning. It maybe worst case.
The farce of it is the many here who say they do not consider they need a vaccine.
Whether it materialises is completely within the public's control.
I never mentioned lockdown. You need to read my comments. Do you accept that?It is called planning. It maybe worst case.
The farce of it is the many here who say they do not consider they need a vaccine.
Whether it materialises is completely within the public's control.
The best case plan they (the trust) have is ludicrous.
alangla said:
320d is all you need said:
I would have thought your "contribution to the economy" drops off as you get older, sort of like a /-------\ shape?
When you're young obviously you're not contributing anything
As you get older and start working, earning money, paying taxes and buying things, you are contributing.
Then in your retirement you may have an initial surge on your pension but you soon end up dribbling in an old peoples home hehe
I wonder what the average yearly outgoings of an 80 year old is.
Surely if you're dribbling in an old people's home then you're spending a colossal amount of money every year? Presumably that cash also trickles down pretty quickly to people at or around minimum wage as well.When you're young obviously you're not contributing anything
As you get older and start working, earning money, paying taxes and buying things, you are contributing.
Then in your retirement you may have an initial surge on your pension but you soon end up dribbling in an old peoples home hehe
I wonder what the average yearly outgoings of an 80 year old is.
I suspect if you are a minimum wage worker then you are mostly spending your money on basic living rather than purchases of excess!
Anyway, it's just a general point rather than a rule or stereotype, I just don't think that mandatory vaccinations for care home workers is fair given the limited testing on the age range at which they are.
Vaccinate the old people, but if they are vaccinated (the old people) it makes no difference to the workers.
Boringvolvodriver said:
Nickgnome said:
oyster said:
To add:
Public sector workers - pay freeze
Pensioners - inflation-busting pay rise
I am one of those pensioners and for many of us it is entirely wrong. Public sector workers - pay freeze
Pensioners - inflation-busting pay rise
However there are millions of pensioners whose only income is that state pension It is about £175/week which does not go far if you are in rented accommodation.
CAH706 said:
I never mentioned lockdown. You need to read my comments. Do you accept that?
The best case plan they (the trust) have is ludicrous.
Accepted the poster to which you replied did though and you seemed to accept his premise. The best case plan they (the trust) have is ludicrous.
I therefore accept that you are not supporting his position.
Knowing the lead of our local ICU and consultant in a different trust I know the challenges they saw. Actually shipping people across hospitals from ICU departments and retraining doctors into ICU nurses. This was real!
With discipline this will to not need to happen again.
What do you think?
It's as clear as day to me, they are going to bring in what is basically a "social life passport". If you wish to go to any kind of venue, pub, restaurant, hotel, music event you will need a digital passport.
Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
Elysium said:
Otispunkmeyer said:
Same. No issue with Vaccines. Its the coercion I do not like.
I also think the speed with which these have been developed and rolled out is cause for a little concern, but actually having listened to those in the know about how these things get done, it does sound like most of the normal steps and processes were done and passed through. The difference was, government writing a blank cheque meant they could just get on and get through these steps in sequence and at speed.
But its just the coercion angle I don't like. I mean maybe someone can just correct my logic here but, as I see it:
1) the vaccines are known to A) significantly reduce the chance of getting severe illness and or ending up in hospital. B) As far as we know, AZN vaccine is also supposed to show up to 70% transmission reduction.
2)The older age groups, 70, 80, 90 are the groups most likely to get severe illness and need hospital. Indeed, this is where we have seen the most deaths and hospitalisations.
3) The vaccine should help those groups immeasurably, keeping them from getting too ill and keeping them from hospital. Though there will be some for whom the vaccine just won't help. Sad, but dare I say it? that is life.
4) The younger groups (i.e. 40 and under), in general, are not at risk of severe illness or of having to visit a hospital. In general, people is this group can just brush this off as a week of feeling grotty. Some more grotty than others granted, but its not life/death.
5) So for this group the benefit of the vaccine is minimal? The only thing would be reduced transmission....BUT!
6) Reduced transmission is said to be from reduced symptoms. If the 40 and unders don't get much in the way of symptoms (again, generally) then is that not the same? Proof of asymptomatic spread is scant? I've seen general feeling of 1 in 5 might be capable of it and of those they are much less likely to spread anyway because of their lack of symptoms. proof of vaccines stopping asymtomatic spread is....is there any?
7) Does it actually matter if the younger groups can spread it if the elderly and otherwise vulnerable are protected already? (save for the cohort where the vaccine is just not effective for whatever reason)... does vaccination of this group actually infer any protection on the older group? (i.e. say we swapped the process, vaccinated everyone under 50 first, would that actually then protect the elderly?)
I dunno, the last points, it just feels like it all circles back to just how many can you protect, how many cases is acceptable, how many deaths is acceptable. This conversation needs to had because its a real thing. We cannot do zero cases, zero deaths, its not practical and the cost is tremendous.
So to me, its just like the flu jab I don't get every year, because I judge that I don't really need it. I've had flu a handful of times, its not the best, but equally they've all been quite mild and after some days resting it off, all is right with the world.
Why can't the covid vaccine be like that?
The trouble is that we still don't know how many people have been exposed to the virus. I also think the speed with which these have been developed and rolled out is cause for a little concern, but actually having listened to those in the know about how these things get done, it does sound like most of the normal steps and processes were done and passed through. The difference was, government writing a blank cheque meant they could just get on and get through these steps in sequence and at speed.
But its just the coercion angle I don't like. I mean maybe someone can just correct my logic here but, as I see it:
1) the vaccines are known to A) significantly reduce the chance of getting severe illness and or ending up in hospital. B) As far as we know, AZN vaccine is also supposed to show up to 70% transmission reduction.
2)The older age groups, 70, 80, 90 are the groups most likely to get severe illness and need hospital. Indeed, this is where we have seen the most deaths and hospitalisations.
3) The vaccine should help those groups immeasurably, keeping them from getting too ill and keeping them from hospital. Though there will be some for whom the vaccine just won't help. Sad, but dare I say it? that is life.
4) The younger groups (i.e. 40 and under), in general, are not at risk of severe illness or of having to visit a hospital. In general, people is this group can just brush this off as a week of feeling grotty. Some more grotty than others granted, but its not life/death.
5) So for this group the benefit of the vaccine is minimal? The only thing would be reduced transmission....BUT!
6) Reduced transmission is said to be from reduced symptoms. If the 40 and unders don't get much in the way of symptoms (again, generally) then is that not the same? Proof of asymptomatic spread is scant? I've seen general feeling of 1 in 5 might be capable of it and of those they are much less likely to spread anyway because of their lack of symptoms. proof of vaccines stopping asymtomatic spread is....is there any?
7) Does it actually matter if the younger groups can spread it if the elderly and otherwise vulnerable are protected already? (save for the cohort where the vaccine is just not effective for whatever reason)... does vaccination of this group actually infer any protection on the older group? (i.e. say we swapped the process, vaccinated everyone under 50 first, would that actually then protect the elderly?)
I dunno, the last points, it just feels like it all circles back to just how many can you protect, how many cases is acceptable, how many deaths is acceptable. This conversation needs to had because its a real thing. We cannot do zero cases, zero deaths, its not practical and the cost is tremendous.
So to me, its just like the flu jab I don't get every year, because I judge that I don't really need it. I've had flu a handful of times, its not the best, but equally they've all been quite mild and after some days resting it off, all is right with the world.
Why can't the covid vaccine be like that?
The Biobank antibody survey published in Dec suggests a minimum of 4.2 million. However, if we assume an IFR of 1% and work back from current deaths this will be more like 13.6 million.
Lets say we have a third wave which adds 50% more infections, no more vaccinations under 50 and 80% protection from death for everyone else.
In that scenario you would expect to see around 15,000 more deaths.
However, thats still only 20million infected. To get to herd immunity you need to wait out 3 more waves. So we might see 60,000 more deaths over the next couple of years.
The argument is that more vaccines in younger people might reduce that. I don't have a problem with encouraging this and promoting the vaccine. But I absolutely draw the line at coercion.
Nickgnome said:
Accepted the poster to which you replied did though and you seemed to accept his premise.
I therefore accept that you are not supporting his position.
Knowing the lead of our local ICU and consultant in a different trust I know the challenges they saw. Actually shipping people across hospitals from ICU departments and retraining doctors into ICU nurses. This was real!
With discipline this will to not need to happen again.
What do you think?
I think the vaccinations (and seasonality plus current restriction lockdown timetable) will provide enough protection to keep hospitalisation's down now. If there is a danger of hospitalisation's increasing too high the gov will keep the restrictions.....so no chance of that trust seeing levels over last April.I therefore accept that you are not supporting his position.
Knowing the lead of our local ICU and consultant in a different trust I know the challenges they saw. Actually shipping people across hospitals from ICU departments and retraining doctors into ICU nurses. This was real!
With discipline this will to not need to happen again.
What do you think?
SCEtoAUX said:
It's as clear as day to me, they are going to bring in what is basically a "social life passport". If you wish to go to any kind of venue, pub, restaurant, hotel, music event you will need a digital passport.
Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
I was worried about the vaccination of the at risk groups, but that seems to have worked out. Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
I actually think its going to be OK and that the vaccine passport b
ks is going to turn out to be just that. bks. I'm probably wrong, but I have decided to be optimistic about it. I have come to the conclusion that this has driven a form of mental illness in most people, causing them to lose their sense of proportion and morality. Its going to be interesting to see how this is going to unwind. In the meantime, most people, including me, are already ignoring the lockdown.
CAH706 said:
I think the vaccinations (and seasonality plus current restriction lockdown timetable) will provide enough protection to keep hospitalisation's down now. If there is a danger of hospitalisation's increasing too high the gov will keep the restrictions.....so no chance of that trust seeing levels over last April.
I sincerely hope not. I don't do certainties.SCEtoAUX said:
It's as clear as day to me, they are going to bring in what is basically a "social life passport". If you wish to go to any kind of venue, pub, restaurant, hotel, music event you will need a digital passport.
Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
The end result of which will be a 2 tier society. Whichever tier you are in, it wont end well. It never has, and it never will. Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
SCEtoAUX said:
It's as clear as day to me, they are going to bring in what is basically a "social life passport". If you wish to go to any kind of venue, pub, restaurant, hotel, music event you will need a digital passport.
Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
Cheer up at least we can go to the pub againCoercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
johnboy1975 said:
Covid powers Bill gone through 484 - 76. 100 odd abstentions
408 majority. Entirely expected
20 labour (plus Corbyn)
Only 40ish of the covid recovery group, who number about 76 IIRC
SNP abstain? Thought they'd be voting...
Dissapointing, but expected. It seems thyere will be no end to this anytime soon then.408 majority. Entirely expected
20 labour (plus Corbyn)
Only 40ish of the covid recovery group, who number about 76 IIRC
SNP abstain? Thought they'd be voting...
Elysium said:
SCEtoAUX said:
It's as clear as day to me, they are going to bring in what is basically a "social life passport". If you wish to go to any kind of venue, pub, restaurant, hotel, music event you will need a digital passport.
Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
I was worried about the vaccination of the at risk groups, but that seems to have worked out. Coercion as clear as night follows day. They can't hold you down and force you to have a vaccine, but they can effectively stop people having any kind of social interraction and enjoyment to make the vaccine unavoidable.
They are going to force ten million young people to be injected with a drug that has absolutely no benefit to them.
Disgusting, tyrannical, draconian and downright evil.
I actually think its going to be OK and that the vaccine passport b
ks is going to turn out to be just that. bks. I'm probably wrong, but I have decided to be optimistic about it. I have come to the conclusion that this has driven a form of mental illness in most people, causing them to lose their sense of proportion and morality. Its going to be interesting to see how this is going to unwind. In the meantime, most people, including me, are already ignoring the lockdown.
I doubt vaccine passports will happen for social events and (some) people are losing perspective on life
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff