Discussion
Ntv said:
I understand the logic, though there are two problems for this argument in respect of COVID ... first, this virus is harmless, or more or less harmless, for almost everyone. Which other virus do we have quasi mandated vaccinations against that is similarly harmless for the 95%+?
Second, a huge cost has been incurred and imposed on everyone for the protection of a tiny, almost all old, minority. I, and many many others, think that has been deeply unethical - for example closing schools to children, banning children from seeing their friends and so on. It won't be easily or quickly forgiven by many.
Well you put harmless to 95%, maybe it is more than 95, maybe less. But 5% of the population is a hell of a percentage to throw under a bus. Included is young people can and do regularly suffer from long Covid even if they have a negligible chance of death. If you suffer from long Covid, then you become a burden on the state and your employer due to the sick leave and ongoing medical treatment you need. Second, a huge cost has been incurred and imposed on everyone for the protection of a tiny, almost all old, minority. I, and many many others, think that has been deeply unethical - for example closing schools to children, banning children from seeing their friends and so on. It won't be easily or quickly forgiven by many.
The debate about if it is ethical to close schools is a genuine debate. But for now they are closed and everyone fronting up and having a vaccine will help them open and stay open. No sympathy for anti-vaxxers or anyone that doesn't get one on non-medical grounds.
deckster said:
I'm bored of saying this. But It's Not About You.
Vaccination works at a societal level. We will get out of this by vaccinating society, not people. Ultimately being vaccinated is a social responsibility, like paying taxes and driving safely.
Which assumes the vaccinations provide "sterilising immunity", which hasn't been proven.Vaccination works at a societal level. We will get out of this by vaccinating society, not people. Ultimately being vaccinated is a social responsibility, like paying taxes and driving safely.
All the various studies have proven is that taking the vaccine significantly reduces your own personal chances of serious infection.
Iminquarantine said:
Well you put harmless to 95%, maybe it is more than 95, maybe less. But 5% of the population is a hell of a percentage to throw under a bus. Included is young people can and do regularly suffer from long Covid even if they have a negligible chance of death. If you suffer from long Covid, then you become a burden on the state and your employer due to the sick leave and ongoing medical treatment you need.
The debate about if it is ethical to close schools is a genuine debate. But for now they are closed and everyone fronting up and having a vaccine will help them open and stay open. No sympathy for anti-vaxxers or anyone that doesn't get one on non-medical grounds.
Are you OK with knowingly injecting children with Covid and rolling the long Covid dice? The debate about if it is ethical to close schools is a genuine debate. But for now they are closed and everyone fronting up and having a vaccine will help them open and stay open. No sympathy for anti-vaxxers or anyone that doesn't get one on non-medical grounds.
I've always said that having "the vaccine" will be completely optional - rather like having a bank account in the UK is completely optional, but in reality if you do not, you will be severely impacted in your ability to live your life in the UK.
Now I await some dhead to tell us that they dont have a bank account and get along perfectly well with stuffing their cash under the mattress
Now I await some dhead to tell us that they dont have a bank account and get along perfectly well with stuffing their cash under the mattress
For new staff.
I've already had experience of this when applying for jobs that ask if you are clinically vulnerable, which is hard when you are trying to find work and stop debts mounting up.
The cv thing in jobs has gone way to far considering how dubious the effectiveness of the jab in the first place is.
I've already had experience of this when applying for jobs that ask if you are clinically vulnerable, which is hard when you are trying to find work and stop debts mounting up.
The cv thing in jobs has gone way to far considering how dubious the effectiveness of the jab in the first place is.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 18th February 15:54
Iminquarantine said:
Ntv said:
I understand the logic, though there are two problems for this argument in respect of COVID ... first, this virus is harmless, or more or less harmless, for almost everyone. Which other virus do we have quasi mandated vaccinations against that is similarly harmless for the 95%+?
Second, a huge cost has been incurred and imposed on everyone for the protection of a tiny, almost all old, minority. I, and many many others, think that has been deeply unethical - for example closing schools to children, banning children from seeing their friends and so on. It won't be easily or quickly forgiven by many.
Well you put harmless to 95%, maybe it is more than 95, maybe less. But 5% of the population is a hell of a percentage to throw under a bus. Included is young people can and do regularly suffer from long Covid even if they have a negligible chance of death. If you suffer from long Covid, then you become a burden on the state and your employer due to the sick leave and ongoing medical treatment you need. Second, a huge cost has been incurred and imposed on everyone for the protection of a tiny, almost all old, minority. I, and many many others, think that has been deeply unethical - for example closing schools to children, banning children from seeing their friends and so on. It won't be easily or quickly forgiven by many.
The debate about if it is ethical to close schools is a genuine debate. But for now they are closed and everyone fronting up and having a vaccine will help them open and stay open. No sympathy for anti-vaxxers or anyone that doesn't get one on non-medical grounds.
The fact you are suggesting in any way they are being thrown under a bus or will be (given they'll be vaccinated!) is absurd
No society in human history has incurred such a high cost to protect a minority from a pandemic. Indeed, perhaps it is the majority not at risk who have been thrown under a bus?
Re the long covid point - no mention at all of this yesterday when MSM covered the deliberate infections in human trials!
dmahon said:
But those vulnerable people are vaccinated and the vaccine doesn’t totally stop you passing it on.
I’m willing to concede it’s a net good to society, but it’s entirely rational to think of yourself and take a pass. It certainly doesn’t make you a moron.
Well said.I’m willing to concede it’s a net good to society, but it’s entirely rational to think of yourself and take a pass. It certainly doesn’t make you a moron.
It’s ironic that anyone who doesn’t share the opinion of the majority is automatically classed as a ‘moron’.
I’m in no rush to have the vaccine. This is for two reasons. Firstly, my body, my choice. But more importantly I think I’ll just stand back and see how this vaccine pans out in regards to long term effects. I certainly don’t see how taking a cautious stance towards an irreversible medical procedure makes me a “moron”. Nor would I support Government or private industry coercion to essentially make people who haven’t had the jab persona-non-grata. That’s not what a liberal society should be doing.
If the guy next to me wants to have the jab, crack on. That’s there choice. Same as it’s my choice not to have it.
Iminquarantine said:
Children aren't being injected with Covid. Vaccines are being trialled on children. Some consenting adults have enrolled in live virus trials.
Apologies, I misunderstood the report on this as it was given to me as 3rd hand info if you like. It is only the Oxford monkey snot vaccine that will be tested on kids.
It just seems very strange to push this upon children without understanding the long term effects on the at risk oldies or working population never mind kids who are at negligible risk.
I see Van Tam is quoted as expecting kids vaccines to be licensed for use by the end of the year. Madness!
LunarOne said:
thewarlock said:
LunarOne said:
You can spread the vaccine whether you are infected or not, but you are a much more effective spreader if you are infected, even if asymptomatic. The vaccine will hopefully reduce everyone's chances of being infected, but it won't mean those people can't spread the virus on their hands by touching supermarket trolleys, toilet flushers, door handles etc etc. Anyway I have my first dose tomorrow, which came as a big surprise considering that I'm 46.
Are you really really short though? I hear that can have an impact on when you're scheduled to be vaccinated!After all, who would want to be stuck behind some wheezing heffalump who cannot fit through the turnstiles whilst the fierce blaze gets ever closer.
deckster said:
I'm bored of saying this. But It's Not About You.
Vaccination works at a societal level. We will get out of this by vaccinating society, not people. Ultimately being vaccinated is a social responsibility, like paying taxes and driving safely.
But those who refuse to see that will never understand.
And yet society manages to function well enough with a significant minority not paying taxes and refusing to drive safely/considerately. I'm mean, yeah, a few people die every year as a result of idiots driving badly, but that seems to be "a price worth paying "to keep the rest of us mobile. And so it will be with Covid-19 and vaccination against it. Enough people will get vaccinated that it reduces the issues caused by those who don't down to "a manageable risk". Those who are vaccinated will be fine. They may carry the virus, possibly even spread it to others, but the vast majority will be saved from serious illness and/or death. Those who don't get vaccinated will risk more serious effects than those who are vaccinated, and life will go on. The professional hand-wringers need to get a grip. People die, as they are destined to do from the moment of their birth. Some from cancer, or heart disease, or accidents or murder. Some from viral or bacterial infections. We won't erradicate Covid so eventually we have to accept that we'll need to develop strategies for living with it. So long as health care systems can cope with the numbers (just as they cope with wholly avoidable accident victims now) then we'll all be fine. The world is going to end one day, but I seriously doubt that Covid will be it's cause of death...Vaccination works at a societal level. We will get out of this by vaccinating society, not people. Ultimately being vaccinated is a social responsibility, like paying taxes and driving safely.
But those who refuse to see that will never understand.
TellYaWhatItIs said:
Apologies, I misunderstood the report on this as it was given to me as 3rd hand info if you like.
It is only the Oxford monkey snot vaccine that will be tested on kids.
It just seems very strange to push this upon children without understanding the long term effects on the at risk oldies or working population never mind kids who are at negligible risk.
I see Van Tam is quoted as expecting kids vaccines to be licensed for use by the end of the year. Madness!
Is it because the theory is that immunised you have a lower viral load if you become infected. Therefore a lower transmission rate, asymptomatic or not. Less transmission, less cases, less risk to everyone?It is only the Oxford monkey snot vaccine that will be tested on kids.
It just seems very strange to push this upon children without understanding the long term effects on the at risk oldies or working population never mind kids who are at negligible risk.
I see Van Tam is quoted as expecting kids vaccines to be licensed for use by the end of the year. Madness!
V1nce Fox said:
Suspect a lot of revised contracts (end of this one, rollover into new one) will be attempted too. This doesn't look good.
I don't even think companies will need to issue new contracts. I've just looked a one of the contract templates we use here and it includes a fairly generic "Health & Safety" clause stating that the employee has a duty to observe the rules and follow policies at all times.Therefore, all companies need to do is show they have performed a risk assessment that requires a Covid vaccination to ensure they are maintaining their duty of care towards employees, customers and general public and update their policies accordingly.
Just to make a scientifically based fact;
The only accurate measure of an individual's susceptibility to Covid19 is their current blood antibody level.
These may be present due to having had the virus, or having had the vaccination.
So I'd expect a legal challenge from an individual who has had Covid19 and has sufficient antibodies, but has not had a vaccine.
They would win.
TLDR: The Gubberment needs to push antibody measurement, not vaccine uptake as the parameter to assess.
The only accurate measure of an individual's susceptibility to Covid19 is their current blood antibody level.
These may be present due to having had the virus, or having had the vaccination.
So I'd expect a legal challenge from an individual who has had Covid19 and has sufficient antibodies, but has not had a vaccine.
They would win.
TLDR: The Gubberment needs to push antibody measurement, not vaccine uptake as the parameter to assess.
21TonyK said:
Is it because the theory is that immunised you have a lower viral load if you become infected. Therefore a lower transmission rate, asymptomatic or not. Less transmission, less cases, less risk to everyone?
I get that, but being a theory it doesn't fill me with confidence. During the trails for the 3 vaccines, they struggled to find enough people WITH Covid to test these theories.
Granting emergency licensing for the new vaccines without the basic data and knowledge on transmission etc just raises a red flag for me.
Iminquarantine said:
Ntv said:
I understand the logic, though there are two problems for this argument in respect of COVID ... first, this virus is harmless, or more or less harmless, for almost everyone. Which other virus do we have quasi mandated vaccinations against that is similarly harmless for the 95%+?
Second, a huge cost has been incurred and imposed on everyone for the protection of a tiny, almost all old, minority. I, and many many others, think that has been deeply unethical - for example closing schools to children, banning children from seeing their friends and so on. It won't be easily or quickly forgiven by many.
Well you put harmless to 95%, maybe it is more than 95, maybe less. But 5% of the population is a hell of a percentage to throw under a bus. Included is young people can and do regularly suffer from long Covid even if they have a negligible chance of death. If you suffer from long Covid, then you become a burden on the state and your employer due to the sick leave and ongoing medical treatment you need. Second, a huge cost has been incurred and imposed on everyone for the protection of a tiny, almost all old, minority. I, and many many others, think that has been deeply unethical - for example closing schools to children, banning children from seeing their friends and so on. It won't be easily or quickly forgiven by many.
The debate about if it is ethical to close schools is a genuine debate. But for now they are closed and everyone fronting up and having a vaccine will help them open and stay open. No sympathy for anti-vaxxers or anyone that doesn't get one on non-medical grounds.
Aren't these people also a burden on the state and their employers?
You'll be saying next that women ought not be employed lest they dare to become pregnant and become a burden on the state and their employers.
yellowjack said:
And yet society manages to function well enough with a significant minority not paying taxes and refusing to drive safely/considerately. I'm mean, yeah, a few people die every year as a result of idiots driving badly, but that seems to be "a price worth paying "to keep the rest of us mobile. And so it will be with Covid-19 and vaccination against it. Enough people will get vaccinated that it reduces the issues caused by those who don't down to "a manageable risk".
You are right, of course.But that doesn't mean that tax evaders and dangerous drivers are to be lauded and appeased for their life choices - and vaccine refusers are in the same box.
Donbot said:
I wonder if this will stop at Wu Flu, or if regular flus will fall into this.
Also what if someone comes back from holiday and gives me yellow fever?
Seems like an over reaction really.
But they won't do that because they will have been vaccinated to visit at risk countries...Also what if someone comes back from holiday and gives me yellow fever?
Seems like an over reaction really.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff