FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Call to end mass vaccinations...
Call to end mass vaccinations...
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. " As long as he puts his name to it carry on  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. " Your decision, nobody else's | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"@masters kitten at some point there will be one or more individuals who hang out in this forum who will try to patronisingly educate you about vaccines and transmission. They will tell you that while the viral load* of a person infected with Covid is the same regardless of whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated. However, they will then tell you that the vaccinated person is only infectious for a shorter amount of time (though nobody can agree what this time period is) and that therefore means it reduces transmission (conveniently ignoring all other actions that could influence that regardless of time period). So folks like you doing the amazing job you do need not worry as if you are vaccinated, then clearly if you spend less time with the people you care for, then you won’t transmit/spread Covid (not sure which days of the week are best, Covid might take Sunday off). *Viral load - this “its the same” point appears to completely ignore how the infected person themselves caught the virus and the viral load THEY were exposed to! Someone working 5 days a week on a Covid ward is exposed to significantly higher viral loads than another person who sat next to an infected person on a bus for 15mins." Thank you @Birldn. I love my job, mainly dementia and alzheimer's clients. I can not see me doing anything else after 8 years. My rota is 2 weeks on 2 weeks off. I spend 24/7 at the clients house, the only interaction with others is if they have visitors or the odd run to pick up things from the nearest shop. We don't interact when we first arrive, shoes off at the door, strip of clothes which go straight in the wash, shower, clean clothes, all before interaction. Face masks where possible, some clients insist on us not wearing them as they don't like them. I am not an anti vaxer bit believe it should be down to the individual. Each person will react differently to the virus and the vaccine. Some of us may even have it bit not test positive. I get this is the unknown and that people want to be safe. Of course they do. I would also fully understand and stick by the clients or family that did not want them in their house if I was not not vaccinated. For people saying you are not forced to have it, yes you are. If not I will have to find another job. I don't want another job. So will be forced to get it to do what I do. I just don't get how it is not being forced on other industries, restaurants where you may serve 100's of people per day, u are interacting with many more people than I am. ??? If I don't get the vaccine what other sectors are they going to bring it into and them I would of given up the job I love for nothing. I am totally stuck on what to do. Xxx Kitten x x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every day is a school day, his advice would seem to be pertinent given the current situation, let's hope it stays valid going forward and we can move to a lower threat and vaccine strategy which I imagine is what everyone wants" It's a new direction.. And yet in the same news story we have this from Boris.. "Our way out of this pandemic is for everyone to get their booster or their first or second dose if they haven’t yet.”.. Don't get the impression he's going to be changing direction anytime soon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"@masters kitten at some point there will be one or more individuals who hang out in this forum who will try to patronisingly educate you about vaccines and transmission. They will tell you that while the viral load* of a person infected with Covid is the same regardless of whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated. However, they will then tell you that the vaccinated person is only infectious for a shorter amount of time (though nobody can agree what this time period is) and that therefore means it reduces transmission (conveniently ignoring all other actions that could influence that regardless of time period). So folks like you doing the amazing job you do need not worry as if you are vaccinated, then clearly if you spend less time with the people you care for, then you won’t transmit/spread Covid (not sure which days of the week are best, Covid might take Sunday off). *Viral load - this “its the same” point appears to completely ignore how the infected person themselves caught the virus and the viral load THEY were exposed to! Someone working 5 days a week on a Covid ward is exposed to significantly higher viral loads than another person who sat next to an infected person on a bus for 15mins. Thank you @Birldn. I love my job, mainly dementia and alzheimer's clients. I can not see me doing anything else after 8 years. My rota is 2 weeks on 2 weeks off. I spend 24/7 at the clients house, the only interaction with others is if they have visitors or the odd run to pick up things from the nearest shop. We don't interact when we first arrive, shoes off at the door, strip of clothes which go straight in the wash, shower, clean clothes, all before interaction. Face masks where possible, some clients insist on us not wearing them as they don't like them. I am not an anti vaxer bit believe it should be down to the individual. Each person will react differently to the virus and the vaccine. Some of us may even have it bit not test positive. I get this is the unknown and that people want to be safe. Of course they do. I would also fully understand and stick by the clients or family that did not want them in their house if I was not not vaccinated. For people saying you are not forced to have it, yes you are. If not I will have to find another job. I don't want another job. So will be forced to get it to do what I do. I just don't get how it is not being forced on other industries, restaurants where you may serve 100's of people per day, u are interacting with many more people than I am. ??? If I don't get the vaccine what other sectors are they going to bring it into and them I would of given up the job I love for nothing. I am totally stuck on what to do. Xxx Kitten x x" You make good points regarding interactions. Trouble is you're looking for sense and reason in the rules and when they are applied with a broad brush to the entire care sector that can be hard. With a bit of luck the advice from Dr Dix may cause a rethink of some of the policies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"@masters kitten at some point there will be one or more individuals who hang out in this forum who will try to patronisingly educate you about vaccines and transmission. They will tell you that while the viral load* of a person infected with Covid is the same regardless of whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated. However, they will then tell you that the vaccinated person is only infectious for a shorter amount of time (though nobody can agree what this time period is) and that therefore means it reduces transmission (conveniently ignoring all other actions that could influence that regardless of time period). So folks like you doing the amazing job you do need not worry as if you are vaccinated, then clearly if you spend less time with the people you care for, then you won’t transmit/spread Covid (not sure which days of the week are best, Covid might take Sunday off). *Viral load - this “its the same” point appears to completely ignore how the infected person themselves caught the virus and the viral load THEY were exposed to! Someone working 5 days a week on a Covid ward is exposed to significantly higher viral loads than another person who sat next to an infected person on a bus for 15mins. Thank you @Birldn. I love my job, mainly dementia and alzheimer's clients. I can not see me doing anything else after 8 years. My rota is 2 weeks on 2 weeks off. I spend 24/7 at the clients house, the only interaction with others is if they have visitors or the odd run to pick up things from the nearest shop. We don't interact when we first arrive, shoes off at the door, strip of clothes which go straight in the wash, shower, clean clothes, all before interaction. Face masks where possible, some clients insist on us not wearing them as they don't like them. I am not an anti vaxer bit believe it should be down to the individual. Each person will react differently to the virus and the vaccine. Some of us may even have it bit not test positive. I get this is the unknown and that people want to be safe. Of course they do. I would also fully understand and stick by the clients or family that did not want them in their house if I was not not vaccinated. For people saying you are not forced to have it, yes you are. If not I will have to find another job. I don't want another job. So will be forced to get it to do what I do. I just don't get how it is not being forced on other industries, restaurants where you may serve 100's of people per day, u are interacting with many more people than I am. ??? If I don't get the vaccine what other sectors are they going to bring it into and them I would of given up the job I love for nothing. I am totally stuck on what to do. Xxx Kitten x x" Keep refusing as you signed a contract to do a job as a cater not to have to take a medical procedure that you don’t want to do!! Also don’t give up your job let them sack you but when they do ask them to put it in writing the reason why and that the reason they sacked you was because you refused to have a medical procedure you didn’t want to take!! That way you can take them to a tribunal or court and claim Compensation there’s been a few cases now and each time they received compensation think the highest amount up to now was £24.000 good luck and thanks for your care my wife uses carers and without those carers my life would be even tougher xxx | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Again, and I've stated this until I'm blue in the face, whilst there are mental anti vaxxers (in the same way there are mental flat earthers) most people who haven't had the vaccine do NOT care if others want the jab (like I don't care if people want the flu jab) What I am against is mandates, and the exclusion of people from society just because they haven't had the vaccine When the president of France states he wants to piss of the citizens because they haven't been jabbed THAT is a problem If, and only of, the vaccines completely stopped transmission there would be an argument for mandates. But it doesn't, do there isn't" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce?" And you sir are the winner of the trophy for the first person to attempt to discredit. Well done, plastic mini trophy is in the post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? And you sir are the winner of the trophy for the first person to attempt to discredit. Well done, plastic mini trophy is in the post." Not trying to didcredit anyone, just asking, you're obviously looking for someone to have a go at | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. " I tend to agree with you and feel the same. I'm double jabbed, boosted and still caught but was not ill in the slightest. I will definitely not be having another booster and I'm prepared now to take my chance | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? And you sir are the winner of the trophy for the first person to attempt to discredit. Well done, plastic mini trophy is in the post."
Being the ex head of the vaccine task force might suggest that he is of sound mind, he has the necessary knowledge and experience to do the job and as such well placed to make a comment? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce?" Errr... Yes they said it at the start and they have continued to say that. Indeed dix himself said that's what they did at the start in the same article..." Speaking to Sky News just now, Dr Clive Dix said the original vaccines were designed to stop infection and transmission as well as serious disease." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"@masters kitten at some point there will be one or more individuals who hang out in this forum who will try to patronisingly educate you about vaccines and transmission. They will tell you that while the viral load* of a person infected with Covid is the same regardless of whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated. However, they will then tell you that the vaccinated person is only infectious for a shorter amount of time (though nobody can agree what this time period is) and that therefore means it reduces transmission (conveniently ignoring all other actions that could influence that regardless of time period). So folks like you doing the amazing job you do need not worry as if you are vaccinated, then clearly if you spend less time with the people you care for, then you won’t transmit/spread Covid (not sure which days of the week are best, Covid might take Sunday off). *Viral load - this “its the same” point appears to completely ignore how the infected person themselves caught the virus and the viral load THEY were exposed to! Someone working 5 days a week on a Covid ward is exposed to significantly higher viral loads than another person who sat next to an infected person on a bus for 15mins. Thank you @Birldn. I love my job, mainly dementia and alzheimer's clients. I can not see me doing anything else after 8 years. My rota is 2 weeks on 2 weeks off. I spend 24/7 at the clients house, the only interaction with others is if they have visitors or the odd run to pick up things from the nearest shop. We don't interact when we first arrive, shoes off at the door, strip of clothes which go straight in the wash, shower, clean clothes, all before interaction. Face masks where possible, some clients insist on us not wearing them as they don't like them. I am not an anti vaxer bit believe it should be down to the individual. Each person will react differently to the virus and the vaccine. Some of us may even have it bit not test positive. I get this is the unknown and that people want to be safe. Of course they do. I would also fully understand and stick by the clients or family that did not want them in their house if I was not not vaccinated. For people saying you are not forced to have it, yes you are. If not I will have to find another job. I don't want another job. So will be forced to get it to do what I do. I just don't get how it is not being forced on other industries, restaurants where you may serve 100's of people per day, u are interacting with many more people than I am. ??? If I don't get the vaccine what other sectors are they going to bring it into and them I would of given up the job I love for nothing. I am totally stuck on what to do. Xxx Kitten x x Keep refusing as you signed a contract to do a job as a cater not to have to take a medical procedure that you don’t want to do!! Also don’t give up your job let them sack you but when they do ask them to put it in writing the reason why and that the reason they sacked you was because you refused to have a medical procedure you didn’t want to take!! That way you can take them to a tribunal or court and claim Compensation there’s been a few cases now and each time they received compensation think the highest amount up to now was £24.000 good luck and thanks for your care my wife uses carers and without those carers my life would be even tougher xxx"Wow, £24000 for losing your job, would some people actually be happy with that ? The same nonsense was spouted about "rights" many times within the NHS more recently with the "agenda for change" ...that worked well, winners all round, pensions ... Plenty of winners there too On a plus side, maybe the ball has been kicked down the road long enough that the millions who took the vaccine have helped ride out the storms and they might not need to have compulsory vaccination. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's a new direction.. And yet in the same news story we have this from Boris.. "Our way out of this pandemic is for everyone to get their booster or their first or second dose if they haven’t yet.”.. Don't get the impression he's going to be changing direction anytime soon. " He will change direction as soon as it suits him, The Sun or his donors. He did over the EU. The only thing you can trust a liar to do is to tell lies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? Errr... Yes they said it at the start and they have continued to say that. Indeed dix himself said that's what they did at the start in the same article..." Speaking to Sky News just now, Dr Clive Dix said the original vaccines were designed to stop infection and transmission as well as serious disease." " Yep that's what they said to begin with | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? And you sir are the winner of the trophy for the first person to attempt to discredit. Well done, plastic mini trophy is in the post. Not trying to didcredit anyone, just asking, you're obviously looking for someone to have a go at" So the quip about Dr Dix being the ex head was not about implying he lacked future credibility then? What did you mean so I am clear? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? Errr... Yes they said it at the start and they have continued to say that. Indeed dix himself said that's what they did at the start in the same article..." Speaking to Sky News just now, Dr Clive Dix said the original vaccines were designed to stop infection and transmission as well as serious disease." " The usual suspects are ominously absent from this thread? Maybe seeking advice from their lobby group masters - that is a joke BTW  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"@masters kitten at some point there will be one or more individuals who hang out in this forum who will try to patronisingly educate you about vaccines and transmission. They will tell you that while the viral load* of a person infected with Covid is the same regardless of whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated. However, they will then tell you that the vaccinated person is only infectious for a shorter amount of time (though nobody can agree what this time period is) and that therefore means it reduces transmission (conveniently ignoring all other actions that could influence that regardless of time period). So folks like you doing the amazing job you do need not worry as if you are vaccinated, then clearly if you spend less time with the people you care for, then you won’t transmit/spread Covid (not sure which days of the week are best, Covid might take Sunday off). *Viral load - this “its the same” point appears to completely ignore how the infected person themselves caught the virus and the viral load THEY were exposed to! Someone working 5 days a week on a Covid ward is exposed to significantly higher viral loads than another person who sat next to an infected person on a bus for 15mins. Thank you @Birldn. I love my job, mainly dementia and alzheimer's clients. I can not see me doing anything else after 8 years. My rota is 2 weeks on 2 weeks off. I spend 24/7 at the clients house, the only interaction with others is if they have visitors or the odd run to pick up things from the nearest shop. We don't interact when we first arrive, shoes off at the door, strip of clothes which go straight in the wash, shower, clean clothes, all before interaction. Face masks where possible, some clients insist on us not wearing them as they don't like them. I am not an anti vaxer bit believe it should be down to the individual. Each person will react differently to the virus and the vaccine. Some of us may even have it bit not test positive. I get this is the unknown and that people want to be safe. Of course they do. I would also fully understand and stick by the clients or family that did not want them in their house if I was not not vaccinated. For people saying you are not forced to have it, yes you are. If not I will have to find another job. I don't want another job. So will be forced to get it to do what I do. I just don't get how it is not being forced on other industries, restaurants where you may serve 100's of people per day, u are interacting with many more people than I am. ??? If I don't get the vaccine what other sectors are they going to bring it into and them I would of given up the job I love for nothing. I am totally stuck on what to do. Xxx Kitten x x Keep refusing as you signed a contract to do a job as a cater not to have to take a medical procedure that you don’t want to do!! Also don’t give up your job let them sack you but when they do ask them to put it in writing the reason why and that the reason they sacked you was because you refused to have a medical procedure you didn’t want to take!! That way you can take them to a tribunal or court and claim Compensation there’s been a few cases now and each time they received compensation think the highest amount up to now was £24.000 good luck and thanks for your care my wife uses carers and without those carers my life would be even tougher xxx
Wow, £24000 for losing your job, would some people actually be happy with that ?
The same nonsense was spouted about "rights" many times within the NHS more recently with the "agenda for change" ...that worked well, winners all round, pensions ... Plenty of winners there too
On a plus side, maybe the ball has been kicked down the road long enough that the millions who took the vaccine have helped ride out the storms and they might not need to have compulsory vaccination.". For someone in the care profession I would hazard a guess £24k isn’t to be sniffed at. They do an amazing job for an insulting salary. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce?" Plenty of people have said the vaccine would stop Covid spreading. They have had to quickly change their tune when the vaccines were unable to fulfil the promises they were making. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"“...child health expert, Professor Helen Bedford of University College London, warned that there was a danger in lumping diehard anti-vaxxers with people who have nagging doubts about getting a vaccine. “If you do that you will miss the chance to persuade those who have genuine concerns but who could change their minds and get vaccinated. It does not help to criticise them all as talking mumbo-jumbo.” Never a truer word said. Well I and others have been saying it on this forum for 18mths but not sure Fab counts as MSM or any of us as experts. Ho hum!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As situations change we adapt our response to them, as we learn more about something like this virus we should take on board what that is and where it's taking us.. Science has in relation to where we were two yrs ago given more tools in the armoury and more knowledge going forward, fact is the numbers twelve months ago were 32,000 deaths in January and we hit 100,000 I think it was march? The vaccines have along with lockdowns saved lives but if we are moving into a different phase then we should adapt to that.. And no mandation for NHS.." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? Plenty of people have said the vaccine would stop Covid spreading. They have had to quickly change their tune when the vaccines were unable to fulfil the promises they were making." It has stopped death from Covid infections spreading though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As situations change we adapt our response to them, as we learn more about something like this virus we should take on board what that is and where it's taking us.. Science has in relation to where we were two yrs ago given more tools in the armoury and more knowledge going forward, fact is the numbers twelve months ago were 32,000 deaths in January and we hit 100,000 I think it was march? The vaccines have along with lockdowns saved lives but if we are moving into a different phase then we should adapt to that.. And no mandation for NHS.." I think that's the point... As we learn we adapt our messages, our response, we don't keep spouting the same stuff that was being said 18 months ago if it's no longer appropriate or accurate. There's some thought provoking stuff in the observer today here...its good to start seeing a more rounded discussion on the way ahead. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/08/end-mass-jabs-and-live-with-covid-says-ex-head-of-vaccine-taskforce | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? Plenty of people have said the vaccine would stop Covid spreading. They have had to quickly change their tune when the vaccines were unable to fulfil the promises they were making. It has stopped death from Covid infections spreading though "They have helped yes, not sure that bit has ever been disputed. ... This from skynews... "Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter has said Boris Johnson took a "gamble" by not imposing more restrictions over Christmas but "may have got away with it". "The cases are not going up as fast as they were and may have stabilised over the whole country, but at very high levels and they're not going to come down rapidly," he told Times Radio. The expert said daily infection rates could still be hitting around 500,000 - much higher than the reported figure - which would be having a "devastating" effect without the protection of vaccines." Now if the daily infections are now half a million.... That's half a million people a day getting some form of natural immunity... That's got to help reduce future serious illness and hospitalisation as well hasn't it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? And you sir are the winner of the trophy for the first person to attempt to discredit. Well done, plastic mini trophy is in the post. Not trying to didcredit anyone, just asking, you're obviously looking for someone to have a go at" Is there not an official ceremony, I was hoping to wear my tux | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. " Two things here. This does not mean that vaccines have no value. The initial two doses remain highly effective at reducing severity of illness. That is one of the major reasons that people "aren't going to be very ill". He does not say that the current booster program is not the correct path. He does not suggest that there is any danger in further boosters, just not necessary for the current variant. He is talking about what comes next. There is nothing controversial about this, is there? He also suggests that a different vaccine should be developed for those at risk. Of course, if there is another variant with different characteristics, more deadly or threatening the young, Dr Dix's recommendation may well change. Correct? There was never an argument that vaccines stop infection on an individual basis. It was always that they reduce infections. If we ever got to a point that we had widespread global vaccination then perhaps it would have been possible to stop further infection with the reduction of mutation speeds. We never got close. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce? Errr... Yes they said it at the start and they have continued to say that. Indeed dix himself said that's what they did at the start in the same article..." Speaking to Sky News just now, Dr Clive Dix said the original vaccines were designed to stop infection and transmission as well as serious disease." " So, again, headlines are not reality. Vaccines would be a big part of stopping the pandemic, but not all. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Memory is an interesting thing. This is from December 2020: 'It is what the UK government's chief medical officer Prof Chris Whitty referred to as "de-risking" this week, when he appeared before MPs at the Health Select Committee. His point was that we could quickly reach a situation at which the level of death and illness caused by Covid was at a level society could "tolerate" - just as we tolerate 7,000 to 20,000 people dying from flu every year. That would allow a gradual move away from the most severe restrictions, he says, perhaps just requiring a bit of continued social distancing and the wearing of face-coverings in some settings. Spring may not be the end of the pandemic, but it certainly should be the beginning of the end.' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55280701.amp From National Geographic in August "How will the pandemic end? The science of past outbreaks offers clues." I'm sure Dr Dix is well aware of what is discussed here, as are the rest of the SAGE committee. 'Where do diseases go? When the worldwide spread of a disease is brought under control in a localised area, it’s no longer a pandemic but an epidemic, according to the WHO. If COVID-19 persists globally at what the WHO judges to be “expected or normal levels,” the organisation will then re-designate the disease “endemic.” At that stage, SARS-CoV-2 will become a circulating virus that’s “less consequential as we build immunity,” says Saad Omer, an epidemiologist and director of the Yale Institute for Global Health. (Read more about how we’ll live with COVID-19 as an endemic disease.) Only two diseases in recorded history that affect humans or other animals have ever been eradicated: smallpox, a life-threatening disease for people that covers bodies in painful blisters, and rinderpest, a viral malady that infected and killed cattle. In both instances, intensive global vaccination campaigns brought new infections to a halt. The last confirmed case of rinderpest was detected in Kenya in 2001, while the last known smallpox case occurred in the U.K. in 1978. Joshua Epstein, professor of epidemiology in the New York University School of Global Public Health and founding director of its Agent-Based Modelling Laboratory, argues that eradication is so rare that the word should be wiped from our disease vocabulary. Diseases “retreat to their animal reservoirs, or they mutate at low levels,” he says. “But they don’t typically literally disappear from the global biome.”' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get the vac ..end of story.. if you don't stay at home and don't go out and stop complaining about your human rights.." If you're scared you stay at home | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. Kitten. " But you could end up in hospital even if you were vaccinated. You have worked and paid taxes and funded the NHS all your life are are fully entitled to a hospital bed if you need one. It is not your fault if you get ill. Nothing is selfish in what you are doing. Do not listen to those who say your actions are selfish, that is simply not true. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. Two things here. This does not mean that vaccines have no value. The initial two doses remain highly effective at reducing severity of illness. That is one of the major reasons that people "aren't going to be very ill". He does not say that the current booster program is not the correct path. He does not suggest that there is any danger in further boosters, just not necessary for the current variant. He is talking about what comes next. There is nothing controversial about this, is there? He also suggests that a different vaccine should be developed for those at risk. Of course, if there is another variant with different characteristics, more deadly or threatening the young, Dr Dix's recommendation may well change. Correct? There was never an argument that vaccines stop infection on an individual basis. It was always that they reduce infections. If we ever got to a point that we had widespread global vaccination then perhaps it would have been possible to stop further infection with the reduction of mutation speeds. We never got close." I can't speak for Dr dix. But yes it is reasonable to assume that in a completely different situation with a different virus variant his advice may very well be different. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get the vac ..end of story.. if you don't stay at home and don't go out and stop complaining about your human rights.." Who put you in charge???????? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get the vac ..end of story.. if you don't stay at home and don't go out and stop complaining about your human rights.." I haven't seen any complaining about human rights in this thread... But yes if you read the article (which appears in all msm outlets now) he's basically saying to treat it like our annual flu vaccine.. for those who are at higher risk get a jab, for those not at risk, don't get a jab and if you get ill stay at home till you feel better... There's quite a lot from him appearing in the media today and it seems to be mostly constructive and move things along a bit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"@masters kitten at some point there will be one or more individuals who hang out in this forum who will try to patronisingly educate you about vaccines and transmission. They will tell you that while the viral load* of a person infected with Covid is the same regardless of whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated. However, they will then tell you that the vaccinated person is only infectious for a shorter amount of time (though nobody can agree what this time period is) and that therefore means it reduces transmission (conveniently ignoring all other actions that could influence that regardless of time period). So folks like you doing the amazing job you do need not worry as if you are vaccinated, then clearly if you spend less time with the people you care for, then you won’t transmit/spread Covid (not sure which days of the week are best, Covid might take Sunday off). *Viral load - this “its the same” point appears to completely ignore how the infected person themselves caught the virus and the viral load THEY were exposed to! Someone working 5 days a week on a Covid ward is exposed to significantly higher viral loads than another person who sat next to an infected person on a bus for 15mins. Thank you @Birldn. I love my job, mainly dementia and alzheimer's clients. I can not see me doing anything else after 8 years. My rota is 2 weeks on 2 weeks off. I spend 24/7 at the clients house, the only interaction with others is if they have visitors or the odd run to pick up things from the nearest shop. We don't interact when we first arrive, shoes off at the door, strip of clothes which go straight in the wash, shower, clean clothes, all before interaction. Face masks where possible, some clients insist on us not wearing them as they don't like them. I am not an anti vaxer bit believe it should be down to the individual. Each person will react differently to the virus and the vaccine. Some of us may even have it bit not test positive. I get this is the unknown and that people want to be safe. Of course they do. I would also fully understand and stick by the clients or family that did not want them in their house if I was not not vaccinated. For people saying you are not forced to have it, yes you are. If not I will have to find another job. I don't want another job. So will be forced to get it to do what I do. I just don't get how it is not being forced on other industries, restaurants where you may serve 100's of people per day, u are interacting with many more people than I am. ??? If I don't get the vaccine what other sectors are they going to bring it into and them I would of given up the job I love for nothing. I am totally stuck on what to do. Xxx Kitten x x Keep refusing as you signed a contract to do a job as a cater not to have to take a medical procedure that you don’t want to do!! Also don’t give up your job let them sack you but when they do ask them to put it in writing the reason why and that the reason they sacked you was because you refused to have a medical procedure you didn’t want to take!! That way you can take them to a tribunal or court and claim Compensation there’s been a few cases now and each time they received compensation think the highest amount up to now was £24.000 good luck and thanks for your care my wife uses carers and without those carers my life would be even tougher xxx"Thank u so much hun. It means a lot. I absolutely looove my job, I would not want to do anything else. The people I meet and care for are absolutely frigging amazing. I live with them 24/7, theu become an extra family member. We get close to so.e of the families too, not all. Haha. £24.000 Holy poop. That's a year amd a half's wages for what I do but what would I do after that. It wouldn't last long. Its not about the money, I would be happy with an "up yours tosser" haha. I can't say I have heard of anyone already doing this but would be interested to find out. I was just thinking of holding Boris and a couple of the other cabinet members to ransom until they no longer made it mandatory or if worse case scenario I had a shot reaction then they would gladly have my 3 kids live with them and be taken care of. X x Kitten | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get the vac ..end of story.. if you don't stay at home and don't go out and stop complaining about your human rights.." Stop talking bollox. I will say it and put up with the shit I get for it. I hope that if u are double jabbed and bolstered up to the hilt that u are staying home too. You still catch it, spread it and are safer than I am without it. So please stay home so that u don't spread it like the shot that is coming out of ur mouth. I am not dead against it, I just do not want it. There may Come a point where I have to take it to stay in the job love and am frigging amazing at. What gives anyone the right to force someone to do something they are unsure of. Kitten x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. " Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times." For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. " The vaccine is a reliable and safe way to develop herd immunity in a society whilst reducing the burden on the health system, but over time as more people catch the covid virus and develop natural immunity the need for the vaccine will be down to a personal choice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times." The problem is that they have NOT done it for good reason.... the house of lord's committee said the government has failed to produce any evidence which justifies a vaccine mandate for NHS staff. Any comment on that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. " If further jabs are the best way forward, that’s fine with me. If other strategies are the best way forward, that’s fine with me too. I am not wedded to one outcome. Not am I going to change my mind based on what one person says. It sounds like the guys is expressing an opinion rather than being based on a body of evidence. If sage and Whitty come up with an alternative strategy, that’s different. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It has clearly been one rule for one and another set of rules for another clearly seen the past two years. The stench of fascism with the illegal coercion is truly alarming for a substance that does not stop you transmitting it, catching it, dying from it then there's then there's the risk with actually having this rushed therapeutic as it clearly is not a vaccine. Adyn Callaghan a 17 year old lad no under lying health issues before jab shortly after receiving it he suddenly developed Essential Thrombocythemia a very rare blood cancer. If people want it that is their choice But if people don't want it then it is imperitive they have that choice.After all there is nothing stopping a Jabbed nurse infected with it passing it on to a patient and subsequently killing them With covid combined with what got them into hospital in the first place.A mandate is not justifiable nor is it viable." This is why the vaccines could be developed so quickly with the same trials carried out. From Nature: 'The world was able to develop COVID-19 vaccines so quickly because of years of previous research on related viruses and faster ways to manufacture vaccines, enormous funding that allowed firms to run multiple trials in parallel, and regulators moving more quickly than normal. Some of those factors might translate to other vaccine efforts, particularly speedier manufacturing platforms.' 'The slowest part of vaccine development isn’t finding candidate treatments, but testing them. This often takes years (see ‘Vaccine innovation’), with companies running efficacy and safety tests on animals and then in humans. Human testing requires three phases that involve increasing numbers of people and proportionately escalating costs. The COVID-19 vaccines went through the same trials, but the billions poured into the process made it possible for companies to take financial risks by running some tests at the same time (see ‘A vaccine in a year’). With large sums given to vaccine firms by public funders and private philanthropists, “they could do preclinical and phase I, II and III trials, as well as manufacturing, in parallel instead of sequentially”, says Rino Rappuoli, chief scientist at GlaxoSmithKline’s vaccines division in Siena, Italy. This meant that companies could gamble on starting large-scale testing and manufacturing of candidates that might not work out. “It was totally de-risking the entire development process,” says Kampmann.' The Covid vaccines, like any vaccine, do not guarantee stopping individuals catching or transmitting Covid, but they significantly REDUCE the potential in conjunction with multiple other steps such as mask wearing and testing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f The intention is to reduce the chance of Covid infection in hospitals and care home. Trying to claim that one individual becoming ill after a vaccination does not mean that there was any connection. You, as a non-specialaist like almost everyone on this site, have less than no idea. It would seem that you have read the headlines about the House of Lords report and not the report. They fully support vaccination. There is no question about their safety. They say that the benefit may be marginal (small). They do not have enough information to confirm this. Their main concern is that there is no clear contingency plan for replacing staff who might leave. In summary, the vaccines are safe, the benefit of the mandate may be smaller than thought, there are not clear enough plans for replacing staff who might leave. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. If further jabs are the best way forward, that’s fine with me. If other strategies are the best way forward, that’s fine with me too. I am not wedded to one outcome. Not am I going to change my mind based on what one person says. It sounds like the guys is expressing an opinion rather than being based on a body of evidence. If sage and Whitty come up with an alternative strategy, that’s different. " That's the reality of science following the reality of a changing virus | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x " You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. The problem is that they have NOT done it for good reason.... the house of lord's committee said the government has failed to produce any evidence which justifies a vaccine mandate for NHS staff. Any comment on that? " It would seem that you have read the headlines about the House of Lords report and not the report. They fully support vaccination. There is no question about their safety. They say that the benefit may be marginal (small). They do not have enough information to confirm this. Their main concern is that there is no clear contingency plan for replacing staff who might leave. In summary, the vaccines are safe, the benefit of the mandate may be smaller than thought, there are not clear enough plans for replacing staff who might leave. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x " It does seem that you are not being provided with adequate explanation, especially if you are generally averse to the idea of medication. Was the graphic on the multiple steps to reduce risk helpful? Where are you getting most of your information from now? This is why the vaccines could be developed so quickly and with the same trials carried out. From Nature: 'The world was able to develop COVID-19 vaccines so quickly because of years of previous research on related viruses and faster ways to manufacture vaccines, enormous funding that allowed firms to run multiple trials in parallel, and regulators moving more quickly than normal. Some of those factors might translate to other vaccine efforts, particularly speedier manufacturing platforms.' 'The slowest part of vaccine development isn’t finding candidate treatments, but testing them. This often takes years (see ‘Vaccine innovation’), with companies running efficacy and safety tests on animals and then in humans. Human testing requires three phases that involve increasing numbers of people and proportionately escalating costs. The COVID-19 vaccines went through the same trials, but the billions poured into the process made it possible for companies to take financial risks by running some tests at the same time (see ‘A vaccine in a year’). With large sums given to vaccine firms by public funders and private philanthropists, “they could do preclinical and phase I, II and III trials, as well as manufacturing, in parallel instead of sequentially”, says Rino Rappuoli, chief scientist at GlaxoSmithKline’s vaccines division in Siena, Italy. This meant that companies could gamble on starting large-scale testing and manufacturing of candidates that might not work out. “It was totally de-risking the entire development process,” says Kampmann.' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. " And yet that's entirely opposite to what dix is quoted as saying. Which is... "But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness." The science / reality seems to have changed but the messages don't seem yet to have caught up. We still have people wedded to the idea they stop infection. Even though it's been slapping us in the face for the last 3 months. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x It does seem that you are not being provided with adequate explanation, especially if you are generally averse to the idea of medication. Was the graphic on the multiple steps to reduce risk helpful? Where are you getting most of your information from now? This is why the vaccines could be developed so quickly and with the same trials carried out. From Nature: 'The world was able to develop COVID-19 vaccines so quickly because of years of previous research on related viruses and faster ways to manufacture vaccines, enormous funding that allowed firms to run multiple trials in parallel, and regulators moving more quickly than normal. Some of those factors might translate to other vaccine efforts, particularly speedier manufacturing platforms.' 'The slowest part of vaccine development isn’t finding candidate treatments, but testing them. This often takes years (see ‘Vaccine innovation’), with companies running efficacy and safety tests on animals and then in humans. Human testing requires three phases that involve increasing numbers of people and proportionately escalating costs. The COVID-19 vaccines went through the same trials, but the billions poured into the process made it possible for companies to take financial risks by running some tests at the same time (see ‘A vaccine in a year’). With large sums given to vaccine firms by public funders and private philanthropists, “they could do preclinical and phase I, II and III trials, as well as manufacturing, in parallel instead of sequentially”, says Rino Rappuoli, chief scientist at GlaxoSmithKline’s vaccines division in Siena, Italy. This meant that companies could gamble on starting large-scale testing and manufacturing of candidates that might not work out. “It was totally de-risking the entire development process,” says Kampmann.'" Of course, those generous private philanthropists don't have any conflict of interest. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. And yet that's entirely opposite to what dix is quoted as saying. Which is... "But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness." The science / reality seems to have changed but the messages don't seem yet to have caught up. We still have people wedded to the idea they stop infection. Even though it's been slapping us in the face for the last 3 months. " He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel" To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. And yet that's entirely opposite to what dix is quoted as saying. Which is... "But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness." The science / reality seems to have changed but the messages don't seem yet to have caught up. We still have people wedded to the idea they stop infection. Even though it's been slapping us in the face for the last 3 months. " Again, he has not said that the unvaccinated should not get a vaccine and booster does he? That does, currently, work. Not questioned. As we are in a major infection surge that advice still stands. He is talking about what comes after. Correct? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. And yet that's entirely opposite to what dix is quoted as saying. Which is... "But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness." The science / reality seems to have changed but the messages don't seem yet to have caught up. We still have people wedded to the idea they stop infection. Even though it's been slapping us in the face for the last 3 months. Again, he has not said that the unvaccinated should not get a vaccine and booster does he? That does, currently, work. Not questioned. As we are in a major infection surge that advice still stands. He is talking about what comes after. Correct?" It gets very tiring discussing all the things he hasn't said. The op was about what he was quoted as saying. And the links to sky and the guardian expand his quotes further. I'm not going to argue about things he didn't say however. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol?" Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Keep refusing as you signed a contract to do a job as a cater not to have to take a medical procedure that you don’t want to do!! Also don’t give up your job let them sack you but when they do ask them to put it in writing the reason why and that the reason they sacked you was because you refused to have a medical procedure you didn’t want to take!! That way you can take them to a tribunal or court and claim Compensation there’s been a few cases now and each time they received compensation think the highest amount up to now was £24.000 good luck and thanks for your care my wife uses carers and without those carers my life would be even tougher xxx"Legally, if the employer makes it a H&S issue, and you refuse the vaccine, they have a few choices. Redeploy you to a job/location where you do not come into contact with vulnerable people. Dismiss you. They can dismiss you immediately if you have less than 2 years service; with no problems. Taking tribunal claims at face value is a risky way to proceed, you need to examine the each case. The claim awarded may have been an employer not taking account of special factors in that employee. Generally, a claim for improper dismissal would only award the lost wages from the date of dismissal. People really need to look at newly available data about *long term brain changes* which occur in a large proportion of infected-but-recovered people. Good luck collecting UC if you are sacked (or at any other time as well). Incidentally, while the argument against vaccines has been ongoing...I have had two doses of AZ, one of Pfizer, one flu, one shingles and another pneumovax. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" People really need to look at newly available data about *long term brain changes* which occur in a large proportion of infected-but-recovered people. " You make a very good point, one thing that people don't seem to care about is that loss of taste and smell are actually thought to be caused by brain damage, nothing to do with the nose and mouth infection. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better" Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Get the vac ..end of story.. if you don't stay at home and don't go out and stop complaining about your human rights.." Nope.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I am happy to see mass vaccinations abandoned as a strategy when a better strategy has been identified. Until then though, vaccines are our best bet. " Yes indeed, it would appear the dogma of whatever the question is, The answer is more jabs, has moved on a bit and some people are now starting to look at appropriate responses for today's challenge, with evidence and data rather than 2 years ago. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Natural Immunity & Antibody testing is an alternative route out of this mess the government should be focusing on next as most people will have caught covid-19 or omicron by now. As the vaccine starts to wane after only 8-12 weeks the best alternative line of defence is natural immunity especially for those with perfectly working and functioning immune systems. Surely your immunity to covid or omicron doesn’t wane as quick as the vaccine?. I think it’s a good idea is to test people for natural antibodies to confirm and see who is more protected against the delta and omicron variants as they have less likelihood of becoming seriously Ill with sufficient antibodies. I don’t think boosters every 3 months is good way to go either as the risk of over whelming the immune system with the contents of the jab can or may increase chances of adverse reactions as too much of one thing can sometimes be bad, maybe just boost the vulnerable or those at high risk if they can’t develop long lasting immunity naturally and this can be an argument for them. Most healthy people who have had covid or omicron will have good natural immunity and antibodies already. Do not underestimate the bodies natural immunity system it’s amazing when functioning right. What happens when the additional booster wanes after 12 weeks does that mean a 4th or 5th shot? when does the need for boosters reduce where you only need to take it once a year like the annual flu jab, surely they can’t keep on jabbing every 3 months to keep people protected or is that their long term plan? Will people continue to go along and agree with this or will most start to get fed up with it all and decide enough is enough? Surely this can’t go on forever." You make some very valid points. Given the infections if you believe the govt statistical modeller prof spiegelhalter are running at 500k a day... That is 5m people in 10 days who you'd imagine would have developed a level of natural immunity every 10 days. . It would be good to test how immune that makes them Compared to vaccine produced immunity. I've seen arguments both ways in these fora but not in the real world. I saw this quote from dix also which relates to what you've said... He urged scientists to focus on vaccines that help boost cellular immune responses, instead of antibody responses. Dr Dix explained: "Your immune system can’t keep making endless antibodies. "It doesn't need to, so it doesn't do it. Antibodies wane anyway, they won't be high all the time. "We should focus on Covid as a normal endemic disease, rather than a pandemic." It's good to see some new approaches to a way forward. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for?" Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals." Is it this one? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59696499 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals. Is it this one? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59696499" I wouldn't class the BBC as a scientific journal lol but you get the idea. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals. Is it this one? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59696499 I wouldn't class the BBC as a scientific journal lol but you get the idea." You said it was all over the news. The article has a headline "Booster at least 80% effective against severe Omicron". It sounds like a good match. Is it the study you are referring to or not? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm unlikely to have a booster. It now seems clear that the seriousness of Omicron is about the same or less than flu. The balance of risk now weighs in favour of just keeping healthy, eating well and taking vitamin D and zinc. I think Ivermectin and HCQ should also be available" Bugger I am almost out of popcorn. Gonna buy a bigger packet for that last sentance! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. " Don’t take your advice from anywhere on social media. It is full of fakes, deluded and wannabe-famous idiots. Avoid falsely claimed doctors and scientists. Listen to the official government, NHS and qualified pandemic experts. Giving out false information is an attack on all of us and potentially dangerous and can cause unnecessary deaths. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lets face it, the current vaccines are short term solutions. You cant keep vaccinating the population every 3-6 months or even every year. Its just not viable." It is if you want the £/$/€ gravy train to keep chugging. Shareholders (and consultants, lobbyists and funded researchers) are enjoying the huge uplift in profits. Yeah but you know “welcome to capitalism” Oh and before the usual suspect(s) shouts “are you saying all govts/politicians/scientists etc are on the take/corrupt” nope I didn’t say that. Just some. Read the actual words! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. Don’t take your advice from anywhere on social media. It is full of fakes, deluded and wannabe-famous idiots. Avoid falsely claimed doctors and scientists. Listen to the official government, NHS and qualified pandemic experts. Giving out false information is an attack on all of us and potentially dangerous and can cause unnecessary deaths. " "Don’t take your advice from anywhere on social media." What about the NHS Twitter account? Isn't that on social media? "Avoid falsely claimed doctors and scientists." Any chance of a translation in plain English please? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. Don’t take your advice from anywhere on social media. It is full of fakes, deluded and wannabe-famous idiots. Avoid falsely claimed doctors and scientists. Listen to the official government, NHS and qualified pandemic experts. Giving out false information is an attack on all of us and potentially dangerous and can cause unnecessary deaths. " Qualified pandemic experts like Dr Clive dix? , former head of the UK govts vaccine task force? Or is that not expert enough for you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lets face it, the current vaccines are short term solutions. You cant keep vaccinating the population every 3-6 months or even every year. Its just not viable. It is if you want the £/$/€ gravy train to keep chugging. Shareholders (and consultants, lobbyists and funded researchers) are enjoying the huge uplift in profits. Yeah but you know “welcome to capitalism” Oh and before the usual suspect(s) shouts “are you saying all govts/politicians/scientists etc are on the take/corrupt” nope I didn’t say that. Just some. Read the actual words!" Don't forget the philanthropists! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals. Is it this one? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59696499 I wouldn't class the BBC as a scientific journal lol but you get the idea. You said it was all over the news. The article has a headline "Booster at least 80% effective against severe Omicron". It sounds like a good match. Is it the study you are referring to or not? " Ah, back to aggression. Happy new year | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Wouldn't it be better if we followed Expert Scientific advice, you know from those people who know how Viruses work?
Clearly, very few here know how a virus does work!
Governments throughout the world are not doing what they are doing just for a laugh, they are trying to protect us! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals. Is it this one? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59696499 I wouldn't class the BBC as a scientific journal lol but you get the idea. You said it was all over the news. The article has a headline "Booster at least 80% effective against severe Omicron". It sounds like a good match. Is it the study you are referring to or not? Ah, back to aggression. Happy new year" Nothing aggressive. Just a simple question. As you haven't provided a source, I will assume you are referring to the modelling by Imperial College London as per the BBC article in the link I posted previously. The first sentence in the BBC article is 'UK researchers have analysed the likely impact that a Covid booster shot will have on Omicron and say it could provide around 85% protection against severe illness.' The report (link in BBC article) doesn't contain the word proven. Where did you get the "booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant" from? More than happy to be shown by yourself where it is because I am unable to find it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals. Is it this one? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59696499 I wouldn't class the BBC as a scientific journal lol but you get the idea. You said it was all over the news. The article has a headline "Booster at least 80% effective against severe Omicron". It sounds like a good match. Is it the study you are referring to or not? Ah, back to aggression. Happy new year Nothing aggressive. Just a simple question. As you haven't provided a source, I will assume you are referring to the modelling by Imperial College London as per the BBC article in the link I posted previously. The first sentence in the BBC article is 'UK researchers have analysed the likely impact that a Covid booster shot will have on Omicron and say it could provide around 85% protection against severe illness.' The report (link in BBC article) doesn't contain the word proven. Where did you get the "booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant" from? More than happy to be shown by yourself where it is because I am unable to find it." I noticed the same language... "could provide" "may provide" "based on limited information" somehow morphs into proof. I was also surprised to see the UKHSA using dodgy data before Christmas, which is rather dispiriting... Its behind a pay wall on the telegraph but linked to here..but if you search UKHSA dodgy data it will pop up in many places... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/12/25/dodgy-data-used-push-tighter-covid-restrictions/ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" He's speaking of vaccines developed two years ago that were not intended to help against "future variants" time people stopped believing what they want to hear and figure out the truth. The vaccines did a great job last year allowing the country to finally open up whilst infection rates and deaths remained low .. Until a substantially different variant came along and rates went through the roof. Amateur epidemiologists hear one thing and make it suit their agenda never mind the facts It's like expecting a petrol car to run on diesel To use your fuel analogy, if the diesel vaccines don't work on the new variants, why are you advocating everyone needs to fill up with diesel when they need petrol? Obviously you weren't listening lol The booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant. Don't worry it's easy to get confused with so much bullshit on social media but the truth is out there if you want to find it. Ps diesel gives 0% efficy against petrol so the vaccine works better Can you confirm your source for the 'booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant' please? And how long is it effective for? Did you miss it ? It was all over the news, the results of the Pfizer vaccine used in trials. They used the omicron virus to challenge antibodies taken from people with two doses and with a booster. They advised that the booster although not specific to the omicron strain was effective. The period that antibodies stay active is determined by monitoring, not by guesswork so that remains to be seen It's available in various scientific journals. Is it this one? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59696499 I wouldn't class the BBC as a scientific journal lol but you get the idea. You said it was all over the news. The article has a headline "Booster at least 80% effective against severe Omicron". It sounds like a good match. Is it the study you are referring to or not? Ah, back to aggression. Happy new year Nothing aggressive. Just a simple question. As you haven't provided a source, I will assume you are referring to the modelling by Imperial College London as per the BBC article in the link I posted previously. The first sentence in the BBC article is 'UK researchers have analysed the likely impact that a Covid booster shot will have on Omicron and say it could provide around 85% protection against severe illness.' The report (link in BBC article) doesn't contain the word proven. Where did you get the "booster was proven to provide up to 80% efficacy against the omicron variant" from? More than happy to be shown by yourself where it is because I am unable to find it. I noticed the same language... "could provide" "may provide" "based on limited information" somehow morphs into proof. I was also surprised to see the UKHSA using dodgy data before Christmas, which is rather dispiriting... Its behind a pay wall on the telegraph but linked to here..but if you search UKHSA dodgy data it will pop up in many places... " Particularly when it appears (yet to be confirmed) the morphing is done by those who shout "misinformation is dangerous" on a regular basis! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm unlikely to have a booster. It now seems clear that the seriousness of Omicron is about the same or less than flu. The balance of risk now weighs in favour of just keeping healthy, eating well and taking vitamin D and zinc. I think Ivermectin and HCQ should also be available" The balance of risks still weighs in favour of vaccination and boosters. The low severity is due to that, in part A healthy lifestyle is an aspiration for everyone for every aspect of health and well-being, not just Covid. Hydrochloquine has been assessed and ruled out. Invermectin is, actually, being trialled, so how about waiting for the results rather than prescribing to others? We could try UV lights up our backsides and bleach-drinking too as someone said it on the interweb. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lets face it, the current vaccines are short term solutions. You cant keep vaccinating the population every 3-6 months or even every year. Its just not viable. It is if you want the £/$/€ gravy train to keep chugging. Shareholders (and consultants, lobbyists and funded researchers) are enjoying the huge uplift in profits. Yeah but you know “welcome to capitalism” Oh and before the usual suspect(s) shouts “are you saying all govts/politicians/scientists etc are on the take/corrupt” nope I didn’t say that. Just some. Read the actual words!" Which ones? Specifically? Whom should we trust and who are suspect? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm unlikely to have a booster. It now seems clear that the seriousness of Omicron is about the same or less than flu. The balance of risk now weighs in favour of just keeping healthy, eating well and taking vitamin D and zinc. I think Ivermectin and HCQ should also be available The balance of risks still weighs in favour of vaccination and boosters. The low severity is due to that, in part A healthy lifestyle is an aspiration for everyone for every aspect of health and well-being, not just Covid. Hydrochloquine has been assessed and ruled out. Invermectin is, actually, being trialled, so how about waiting for the results rather than prescribing to others? We could try UV lights up our backsides and bleach-drinking too as someone said it on the interweb. "You've been buying into misinformation | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. And yet that's entirely opposite to what dix is quoted as saying. Which is... "But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness." The science / reality seems to have changed but the messages don't seem yet to have caught up. We still have people wedded to the idea they stop infection. Even though it's been slapping us in the face for the last 3 months. Again, he has not said that the unvaccinated should not get a vaccine and booster does he? That does, currently, work. Not questioned. As we are in a major infection surge that advice still stands. He is talking about what comes after. Correct? It gets very tiring discussing all the things he hasn't said. The op was about what he was quoted as saying. And the links to sky and the guardian expand his quotes further. I'm not going to argue about things he didn't say however. " It is also tiring correcting the impression being given that Dr Dix thinks that vaccination is no longer necessary. People should receive initial two doses plus booster. You can see from many posts that the interpretation is completely different. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lets face it, the current vaccines are short term solutions. You cant keep vaccinating the population every 3-6 months or even every year. Its just not viable. It is if you want the £/$/€ gravy train to keep chugging. Shareholders (and consultants, lobbyists and funded researchers) are enjoying the huge uplift in profits. Yeah but you know “welcome to capitalism” Oh and before the usual suspect(s) shouts “are you saying all govts/politicians/scientists etc are on the take/corrupt” nope I didn’t say that. Just some. Read the actual words! Which ones? Specifically? Whom should we trust and who are suspect?" You tell me. You appear to think you know the answer to everything else! Naming individuals is also a sure route towards slander (unless you can afford litigation) so best not aye? BTW note you do not actually disagree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. And yet that's entirely opposite to what dix is quoted as saying. Which is... "But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness." The science / reality seems to have changed but the messages don't seem yet to have caught up. We still have people wedded to the idea they stop infection. Even though it's been slapping us in the face for the last 3 months. Again, he has not said that the unvaccinated should not get a vaccine and booster does he? That does, currently, work. Not questioned. As we are in a major infection surge that advice still stands. He is talking about what comes after. Correct? It gets very tiring discussing all the things he hasn't said. The op was about what he was quoted as saying. And the links to sky and the guardian expand his quotes further. I'm not going to argue about things he didn't say however. It is also tiring correcting the impression being given that Dr Dix thinks that vaccination is no longer necessary. People should receive initial two doses plus booster. You can see from many posts that the interpretation is completely different." Except it really isn’t. It is quite clear what Dr Dix was saying and how it was future focused and not a criticism of vaccines themselves. I think most people understand that. You appear to have a very low opinion on the intelligence of your fellow swingers and seem to have appointed yourself to educate everyone no matter how patronising that is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It is also tiring correcting the impression being given that Dr Dix thinks that vaccination is no longer necessary. People should receive initial two doses plus booster. You can see from many posts that the interpretation is completely different." Yes I can understand it is quite tiring. The trouble is you seem to either misunderstand, reinterpret or see words that have not been written. Nobody has implied that dix said vaccines are no longer necessary. What his comments have opened up is a discussion for a way forward. And the relevance is he is credible, an expert and has been front and centre of the govt efforts so far. Now as for what people should do... That's up to their own choices and I have no view on what others should be doing. So hopefully for the avoidance of any doubt here are some of his insights again. Dr Dix said: "Given Omicron is a much, much more mild variant now, it is pointless to keep giving more vaccines to people who are not going to get very ill. "We should let them get ill. We should focus on why vaccines are good at stopping disease. "What we have seen as the variants have come about is that the vaccines are less effective at stopping infection and transmission, but they are very good still at stopping people getting a severe disease." He called for the country to move towards a "new normality" where people go to work and "go about their business" if they do not feel ill. When asked what the Government should focus on after the current booster campaign, Dr Dix responded: "We need to focus on persuading people who haven't been vaccinated to get a vaccine, that's very important. "We need a targeted approach to those who really need vaccines, rather than boosting everyone. We must stop mass vaccine campaigns after this current booster campaign." .. So once again, its good to finally see some thinking about our strategy and what happens next from an expert. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'd feel rather better about "we should let them get ill" if the evidence was in that omicron has significantly less chance of causing long covid, but it isn't yet. Long covid never gets mentioned in these arguments. It's a thing. It's a worry. We shouldn't be careless about it. " Yes. I fear, once again, we're sleepwalking into disaster. I won't be partaking if I can avoid it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'd feel rather better about "we should let them get ill" if the evidence was in that omicron has significantly less chance of causing long covid, but it isn't yet. Long covid never gets mentioned in these arguments. It's a thing. It's a worry. We shouldn't be careless about it. " Yes I personally feel the same way. It's a bastard that touches people in so many different ways. Thankfully the vast majority don't seem badly affected. Killed my mum 358 days ago. We don't yet have anything long term on it or the vaccines . As an example (no idea how accurate this is) but saw someone today saying the loss of smell / taste might be a brain injury which is not to be sniffed at. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lets face it, the current vaccines are short term solutions. You cant keep vaccinating the population every 3-6 months or even every year. Its just not viable. It is if you want the £/$/€ gravy train to keep chugging. Shareholders (and consultants, lobbyists and funded researchers) are enjoying the huge uplift in profits. Yeah but you know “welcome to capitalism” Oh and before the usual suspect(s) shouts “are you saying all govts/politicians/scientists etc are on the take/corrupt” nope I didn’t say that. Just some. Read the actual words! Which ones? Specifically? Whom should we trust and who are suspect? You tell me. You appear to think you know the answer to everything else! Naming individuals is also a sure route towards slander (unless you can afford litigation) so best not aye? BTW note you do not actually disagree." Why should I answer questions for you? Again, if you have a hypothesis, you should back it shouldn't you? Commit to answering some of your vague accusations for a change. Are our government and pharmaceutical companies and scientists lying to us about the safety of and necessity for vaccines? I say no. What do you say? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I work as a live in carer. Most of our work force have been double jabbed and boosted and about to be boosted again. This has not stopped them catching it, spreading it or having to isolate. Yes it helps people that are vaccinated not become deadly ill but it does nothing to stop the spread. I have to make the decision to change job or be forced to get vaccinated. The only person I am putting in danger is myself if I do not have it. Even if I was vaccinated I can still contract and pass on. The one way I am being selfish is if I expected to have a hospital bed if I contracted it and needed hospitalisation. I can't see where the boosters are going to end, just wondering if they are gonna bring out a loyalty card with free cinema trip or something when you reach ur 10th.. Kitten. I understand both sides as to why we should or should not get it, my reason is that I can't be sure what the long term affect on myself will be. Nobody has said that vaccinations stop people from catching or spreading Covid. You do not, actually, know how seriously ill they would have been or if they would have spread it to more people. The data that exists indicates that would have been the case. In a high risk setting such as yours the intention is to minimise risk as much as possible. The vaccine has the biggest effect but it is one layer of many. This is a good explanation: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-40ac92b1-1750-4e86-9936-2cda6b0acb3f Considering your dedication, I'm guessing that you wouldn't disagree with that aim. As ever in these matters, someone's own personal experience is only that. It does not explain what is happening at the national level or why a certain course of action will improve or worsen a situation. The vaccine mandate for carers and frontline medical staff was not imposed for fun, so I guess you have to ask why? If they have done it for a good reason then the next question is why is it so important for you to not have it? Tough choices, but these are not normal times. For me, my choice is because I hate to and do not take meds unless it is a do or die situation. I've never had the flu vaccine, I'm no doctor, scientist or anything other than a regular person trying to make an informed choice but not being given the chance or time to do it. I don't have anyone in the know to sit down with and answer concerns and questions I have. It worries me that we do not know long term affects. The slogan was to get the jab amd stop the spread. Save lives he said. I get that this is all new for everyone dealing with it but I'm a nosey person that believes I should have the right to refuse it without the worry of losing my job because of it. I have bills to pay, kids to feed. Its not a brill paid job but it's the one job, (apart from pleasing Mt Master of course) that I am frigging amazing at. I've dedicated 8 years of my life to it, spent 4 years of that away from my kids. For what. The only person that is at risk if I do not get is myself. I can't fathom in my ( maybe tiny carer brain) how, why I should be forced to chose. To put chemicals into my body I want it to be my choice. I want to know what possible side affects may occur, if not now then maybe years down the line. They can not tell us because they do not know. Scared, shit, yes I am. Hate feeling this way. It is constantly there and within the next week and a half I have to make the decision....... It's a bit like the brexit sell, people voted on what shit he spouted and promised. This seems eclxactly the same as in the way it has been done, sold. X x Kitten x You say that the only person that you put at risk if you don’t get jabbed is yourself. That isn’t true. Not getting jabbed increases your chances of catching the virus, and also increase your chances of passing it on to others. And yet that's entirely opposite to what dix is quoted as saying. Which is... "But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness." The science / reality seems to have changed but the messages don't seem yet to have caught up. We still have people wedded to the idea they stop infection. Even though it's been slapping us in the face for the last 3 months. Again, he has not said that the unvaccinated should not get a vaccine and booster does he? That does, currently, work. Not questioned. As we are in a major infection surge that advice still stands. He is talking about what comes after. Correct? It gets very tiring discussing all the things he hasn't said. The op was about what he was quoted as saying. And the links to sky and the guardian expand his quotes further. I'm not going to argue about things he didn't say however. It is also tiring correcting the impression being given that Dr Dix thinks that vaccination is no longer necessary. People should receive initial two doses plus booster. You can see from many posts that the interpretation is completely different. Except it really isn’t. It is quite clear what Dr Dix was saying and how it was future focused and not a criticism of vaccines themselves. I think most people understand that. You appear to have a very low opinion on the intelligence of your fellow swingers and seem to have appointed yourself to educate everyone no matter how patronising that is." You should read some of the posts on this thread then. We wouldn't have conspiracy theories at all if everybody was able to make completely clear decisions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It is also tiring correcting the impression being given that Dr Dix thinks that vaccination is no longer necessary. People should receive initial two doses plus booster. You can see from many posts that the interpretation is completely different. Yes I can understand it is quite tiring. The trouble is you seem to either misunderstand, reinterpret or see words that have not been written. Nobody has implied that dix said vaccines are no longer necessary. What his comments have opened up is a discussion for a way forward. And the relevance is he is credible, an expert and has been front and centre of the govt efforts so far. Now as for what people should do... That's up to their own choices and I have no view on what others should be doing. So hopefully for the avoidance of any doubt here are some of his insights again. Dr Dix said: "Given Omicron is a much, much more mild variant now, it is pointless to keep giving more vaccines to people who are not going to get very ill. "We should let them get ill. We should focus on why vaccines are good at stopping disease. "What we have seen as the variants have come about is that the vaccines are less effective at stopping infection and transmission, but they are very good still at stopping people getting a severe disease." He called for the country to move towards a "new normality" where people go to work and "go about their business" if they do not feel ill. When asked what the Government should focus on after the current booster campaign, Dr Dix responded: "We need to focus on persuading people who haven't been vaccinated to get a vaccine, that's very important. "We need a targeted approach to those who really need vaccines, rather than boosting everyone. We must stop mass vaccine campaigns after this current booster campaign." .. So once again, its good to finally see some thinking about our strategy and what happens next from an expert. " This clarifies both your view and Dr Dix's intent. I read your original headline and comments with a different eye, driven in part by some of the reactions which really are from those sceptical of the vaccine and using this as "evidence". I did add the extra information about there still not being enough information to conclude that Omicron really is milder though. It's reduced severity quite possibly being linked to the relatively high vaccine uptake. We should find out in time to inform the next decision. One additional point to consider is the possibility of a Covid vaccine being needed as children become adults well into the future or on an on-going basis to ensure a baseline severity reduction? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nobody has ever said the vaccine would stop covid spreading it would not make you as ill, also is that why he is the ex head of the vaccine taskforce?" When the vaccines were first introduced, all the MSM and the people in positions of power were saying was that the vaccines will stop the spread and if you get a vaccine, you will not get covid. It was broadcast on the news around the world. Unfortunately people choose to ignore or deny this fact and possibly because they were drawn in to the vaccines work chat and are now embarrassed. Why else is there talk of not needing a 4th shot, and lets learn to live with it....its because they realise the uptake is not as good as they wanted, so they are now pushing another strategy. lol....what a comedy show. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Happy for people to exercise their PERSONAL choice to refuse to be vaccinated. The SOCIAL response to the public health chalenges posed by people exercising PERSONAL choice is to advise these folk that their PERSONAL choice carries consequences and I advocate that they be advised that the SOCIETAL response is the witholding of hospital facilities in order that others needing hospitalisation, for numerous non-Covid reasons, can be provided with the treatment they require. Everyone is clamouring about their rights, but pretty silent on their responsibilities and the consequences of their freedoms " Not sure too many on this thread have been clamouring other than those like yourself braying 2 year old messages about getting a vax or else. It's moved on. The situation has moved on. The virus variant has moved on. Time the messages started to refresh with what the situation is today and not what it was 18 months ago. Thankfully we are starting to see some new thinking about the way out of this...and it just may not be endless vaccine bullying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What happened to the groundbreaking astrazeneca it's pfizer Pfizer and more Pfizer now. See people who hold that view of well you refuse the vaccine you refuse treatment. I put it to them every death non related to covid in an unjabbed person be paid for out of their own pocket and held accountable For denying Those people treatment through their imbecilic views. They never seem to have weight to their arguments take the nhs that will be privatised very soon out the equation and your left with a flapping fish in a puddle.Albert Steptoe springs to mind" Is that your educated opinion or a refresh of face tube data | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What happened to the groundbreaking astrazeneca it's pfizer Pfizer and more Pfizer now. See people who hold that view of well you refuse the vaccine you refuse treatment. I put it to them every death non related to covid in an unjabbed person be paid for out of their own pocket and held accountable For denying Those people treatment through their imbecilic views. They never seem to have weight to their arguments take the nhs that will be privatised very soon out the equation and your left with a flapping fish in a puddle.Albert Steptoe springs to mind Is that your educated opinion or a refresh of face tube data" AstraZeneca killed my father 3 days after his second dose!! it has killed thousands of people !! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Condolences for your loss soft swap I hope you were not prevented from seeing him while they clearly had no fear of what is going on and different rules entierly. Thousands might be world wide but in the UK alone 1.5k have died from adverse reactions to it which is hardly rare. We still yet to see the long term effects I just hope people are in good health who have had it. 50k the average figure for influenza death anually in the uk. Add for arguments sake people who died of pneumonia,cancer, common cold and of course covid we cannot ignore deaths were reported as Died WITH covid And marked down as death by covid so add those numbers up and it very close indeed. Do I believe there has been a virus absolutely. do I believe it has been a power grab exploitation of a virus. Quite clealy. People were wondering why the cold and influenza vanished for two years like it went on holiday" your figures for dying of influenza in the UK are way off. The number for influenza only is 5K! The number of influenza/pneumonia is 25k either way you are exaggerating the numbers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Happy for people to exercise their PERSONAL choice to refuse to be vaccinated. The SOCIAL response to the public health chalenges posed by people exercising PERSONAL choice is to advise these folk that their PERSONAL choice carries consequences and I advocate that they be advised that the SOCIETAL response is the witholding of hospital facilities in order that others needing hospitalisation, for numerous non-Covid reasons, can be provided with the treatment they require. Everyone is clamouring about their rights, but pretty silent on their responsibilities and the consequences of their freedoms " Ridiculous! Over 18mths into the pandemic when we categorically know that obesity and/or smoking dramatically increases your risk of serious issues from Covid, but so many of these people haven’t lost weight, improved lifestyle and diet, got fitter, given up smoking. That is their PERSONAL choice but I would say that is highly irresponsible and selfish ss they have SOCIETAL responsibilities. Therefore if you want to discriminate against the unvaccinated for medical treatment then you need to ALSO discriminate against the obese and smokers. Or perhaps not discriminate at all in a civilised democratic society! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Condolences for your loss soft swap I hope you were not prevented from seeing him while they clearly had no fear of what is going on and different rules entierly. Thousands might be world wide but in the UK alone 1.5k have died from adverse reactions to it which is hardly rare. We still yet to see the long term effects I just hope people are in good health who have had it. 50k the average figure for influenza death anually in the uk. Add for arguments sake people who died of pneumonia,cancer, common cold and of course covid we cannot ignore deaths were reported as Died WITH covid And marked down as death by covid so add those numbers up and it very close indeed. Do I believe there has been a virus absolutely. do I believe it has been a power grab exploitation of a virus. Quite clealy. People were wondering why the cold and influenza vanished for two years like it went on holiday" Just for balance. The average (in a normal year) is 10k deaths a year in the UK from Flu. There was an anomalous year in 2018 (I think) when that figure rose to just over 50k. Part of the reason was that they chose the wrong 4 Flu strains to make a jab from. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Says Dr Clive dix... 'Pointless' to give more vaccines to people who aren't going to be very ill, says expert As we reported earlier, the former head of the UK's vaccines taskforce has called for mass vaccination to end after the booster campaign. But new, more transmissible variants mean they "do not stop infections any more", even though they are still very effective at preventing severe illness. Dr Dix said we are dealing with a "much, much milder variant" now so it is "pointless giving more and more vaccine to people who are not going to get very ill". Interesting comments that might finally take the foot off the throat. Also interesting his quote that vaccines do not stop infections any more which has been continually argued about in these fora. It would be good to see a plan to take us forward other than more and more jabs. Hopefully his words will spur some more constructive thinking now. " Well of course, the merc and Pfizer covid pills are now available to treat covid. At 600 quid or some outrageous cost. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I find it interesting how in the last few days we have two hard to discredit professionals question the need for ongoing vaccination or mandatory vaccination (as opposed to someone easier to label a quack). Something many of us have been saying for some time. Perhaps in weeks to come we may see some more become increasingly brave and speak up and share a wider set of views (pro, anti, in between) without worrying about the inevitable character assassination and professional suicide that has invariably followed. And before the usual suspect(s) starts shouting “they didn’t say vaccines don’t work” I know. Neither have I! Read what is written not what you want to be written." Once a better idea has been proven as the best way forward, I’m in. Proven, not “suggested”. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Condolences for your loss soft swap I hope you were not prevented from seeing him while they clearly had no fear of what is going on and different rules entierly. Thousands might be world wide but in the UK alone 1.5k have died from adverse reactions to it which is hardly rare. We still yet to see the long term effects I just hope people are in good health who have had it. 50k the average figure for influenza death anually in the uk. Add for arguments sake people who died of pneumonia,cancer, common cold and of course covid we cannot ignore deaths were reported as Died WITH covid And marked down as death by covid so add those numbers up and it very close indeed. Do I believe there has been a virus absolutely. do I believe it has been a power grab exploitation of a virus. Quite clealy. People were wondering why the cold and influenza vanished for two years like it went on holiday" A lot of made-up numbers there! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Condolences for your loss soft swap I hope you were not prevented from seeing him while they clearly had no fear of what is going on and different rules entierly. Thousands might be world wide but in the UK alone 1.5k have died from adverse reactions to it which is hardly rare. We still yet to see the long term effects I just hope people are in good health who have had it. 50k the average figure for influenza death anually in the uk. Add for arguments sake people who died of pneumonia,cancer, common cold and of course covid we cannot ignore deaths were reported as Died WITH covid And marked down as death by covid so add those numbers up and it very close indeed. Do I believe there has been a virus absolutely. do I believe it has been a power grab exploitation of a virus. Quite clealy. People were wondering why the cold and influenza vanished for two years like it went on holiday your figures for dying of influenza in the UK are way off. The number for influenza only is 5K! The number of influenza/pneumonia is 25k either way you are exaggerating the numbers. " The headline figures for 'COVID deaths' are totals since the 'pandemic' started. They are not reset every year like the influenza/pneumonia figures are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The head of the JCVI recently said something similar. It's only big pharma that want to keep jabbing endlessly - wonder why that is... $$$" Most governments around the world are still pushing vaccination programmes and will probably continue to do so until better options are proven. Abandoning programmes that have saved tons of lives, while we try to figure out if there is a better way forward, doesn’t sound like a smart idea. Find a more successful way forward, prove that it is better, adopt that plan. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Condolences for your loss soft swap I hope you were not prevented from seeing him while they clearly had no fear of what is going on and different rules entierly. Thousands might be world wide but in the UK alone 1.5k have died from adverse reactions to it which is hardly rare. We still yet to see the long term effects I just hope people are in good health who have had it. 50k the average figure for influenza death anually in the uk. Add for arguments sake people who died of pneumonia,cancer, common cold and of course covid we cannot ignore deaths were reported as Died WITH covid And marked down as death by covid so add those numbers up and it very close indeed. Do I believe there has been a virus absolutely. do I believe it has been a power grab exploitation of a virus. Quite clealy. People were wondering why the cold and influenza vanished for two years like it went on holiday Just for balance. The average (in a normal year) is 10k deaths a year in the UK from Flu. There was an anomalous year in 2018 (I think) when that figure rose to just over 50k. Part of the reason was that they chose the wrong 4 Flu strains to make a jab from." I was wrong! The average is 10-25k | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own" As do all the obese people and smokers who have refused/failed to change their lifestyles despite knowing for over 18mths that it puts them at significantly higher risk of serious Covid illness and hospitalisation taking up resources in exactly the same way. Or perhaps we shouldn’t vilify any group in a civilised society. Just a thought! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own As do all the obese people and smokers who have refused/failed to change their lifestyles despite knowing for over 18mths that it puts them at significantly higher risk of serious Covid illness and hospitalisation taking up resources in exactly the same way. Or perhaps we shouldn’t vilify any group in a civilised society. Just a thought! " Wasting your breath. Even Boris is still obese and he nearly died last time! Covid has killed any link people had to personal responsibility for their health. To the extent you now have fat politicians, fat radio presenters, even fat doctors saying the only thing you can do is get drugs stuck in you. Meanwhile the hospitals are full of fat people in covid wards, heart disease wards, diabetes clinics, the list goes on. I do wonder quite HOW specific an illness needs to be in its attempt to kill the unhealthy before any gov gives a hoot. Right now you could literally have aliens land and walk around zapping fat people only and still governments wouldn’t dare suggest people put down the pizza. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own As do all the obese people and smokers who have refused/failed to change their lifestyles despite knowing for over 18mths that it puts them at significantly higher risk of serious Covid illness and hospitalisation taking up resources in exactly the same way. Or perhaps we shouldn’t vilify any group in a civilised society. Just a thought! Wasting your breath. Even Boris is still obese and he nearly died last time! Covid has killed any link people had to personal responsibility for their health. To the extent you now have fat politicians, fat radio presenters, even fat doctors saying the only thing you can do is get drugs stuck in you. Meanwhile the hospitals are full of fat people in covid wards, heart disease wards, diabetes clinics, the list goes on. I do wonder quite HOW specific an illness needs to be in its attempt to kill the unhealthy before any gov gives a hoot. Right now you could literally have aliens land and walk around zapping fat people only and still governments wouldn’t dare suggest people put down the pizza. " The more obese people there are, the more it normalises being obese and the less pressure people feel to get themselves to a healthy weight. Governments (not just ours), know that there are millions of people in this category, so treat them with kid gloves ... gentle messages, support for obese people etc rather than giving a harsher message that they are killing themselves and bollocksing up the health service. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Pfizer CEO “We know that the 2 doses of the vaccine offer VERY LIMITED protection IF ANY” Hahaha you’ve all been played. Health professionals now saying we don’t need to boost and offer so many shots…only for the at risk category including elderly. " Yes. If you haven’t had the boosters then the original 2 doses (Feb and may last year in my case), have very little benefit at this stage. That does not, however, mean that we have been “played”. That’s like going back the pub you were in last night and complaining because the effects of the beer you had paid for seem to have worn off. Nobody thought they the 2 jabs would immunise us for life. They was never the message. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own As do all the obese people and smokers who have refused/failed to change their lifestyles despite knowing for over 18mths that it puts them at significantly higher risk of serious Covid illness and hospitalisation taking up resources in exactly the same way. Or perhaps we shouldn’t vilify any group in a civilised society. Just a thought! Wasting your breath. Even Boris is still obese and he nearly died last time! Covid has killed any link people had to personal responsibility for their health. To the extent you now have fat politicians, fat radio presenters, even fat doctors saying the only thing you can do is get drugs stuck in you. Meanwhile the hospitals are full of fat people in covid wards, heart disease wards, diabetes clinics, the list goes on. I do wonder quite HOW specific an illness needs to be in its attempt to kill the unhealthy before any gov gives a hoot. Right now you could literally have aliens land and walk around zapping fat people only and still governments wouldn’t dare suggest people put down the pizza. The more obese people there are, the more it normalises being obese and the less pressure people feel to get themselves to a healthy weight. Governments (not just ours), know that there are millions of people in this category, so treat them with kid gloves ... gentle messages, support for obese people etc rather than giving a harsher message that they are killing themselves and bollocksing up the health service. " They should be denied medical treatment on the NHS the selfish basta7ds! Clogging up beds and using up resources that stops other people getting treatment who actually deserve it!!!!!!!!! BTW I don’t really think that but certain people on here keep posting this type of post just swapping out the obese for unvaccinated. Just thought I’d get in first! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mandatory Jabbers are like a flapping fish in a puddle it is such a weak argument they put forward and it is always the NHS beds beds sack the staff beds beds sack more staff the nhs is in a staff crisis sack more staff the beds the beds, we only want nurses who are Jabbed that can transmit covid on to sick people. Prove it is solely people unjabbed who have not received a single dose causing an ICU crisis. Looks pretty self inflicted by tyrannical legislation to me. " Jabs have been a huge help in getting us this far. In a year’s time, i suspect that the treatments / measures for preventing the spread of Covid and for curing people who have it will look quite different, as new treatments become available. Once better options have been proved as the best way forward, we can adopt those options. In the meantime, jabs are clearly our best option. Only an idiot would suggest abandoning vaccines until we have a proven better option to transition to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Pfizer CEO “We know that the 2 doses of the vaccine offer VERY LIMITED protection IF ANY” Hahaha you’ve all been played. Health professionals now saying we don’t need to boost and offer so many shots…only for the at risk category including elderly. Yes. If you haven’t had the boosters then the original 2 doses (Feb and may last year in my case), have very little benefit at this stage. That does not, however, mean that we have been “played”. That’s like going back the pub you were in last night and complaining because the effects of the beer you had paid for seem to have worn off. Nobody thought they the 2 jabs would immunise us for life. They was never the message. " However, people are disappointed and in some cases angry or growing in mistrust because the 2 doses was positioned as the way out. While careful to never say “life time immunity” it was heavily implied this was job done. People who pointed out that as Corona is a virus and Viruses mutate and so regular ongoing boosters would be required, were initially labelled conspiracy nuts. However, over time a gradual shift in narrative has normalised the acceptance of ongoing boosters (although to be more accurate, like Flu, because of mutation it is not strictly a booster it needs to be a revised vaccine to address mutations/strains). (Not you) implying that people misunderstood what was really meant is incredibly disingenuous. Most people only see/read/hear the headlines and back then it was the miracle cure. While the vaccines have worked wonders short term, they have fallen short of what many people believe they were sold and continue to do so with what appears to be far higher levels of efficacy drop than originally claimed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Pfizer CEO “We know that the 2 doses of the vaccine offer VERY LIMITED protection IF ANY” Hahaha you’ve all been played. Health professionals now saying we don’t need to boost and offer so many shots…only for the at risk category including elderly. Yes. If you haven’t had the boosters then the original 2 doses (Feb and may last year in my case), have very little benefit at this stage. That does not, however, mean that we have been “played”. That’s like going back the pub you were in last night and complaining because the effects of the beer you had paid for seem to have worn off. Nobody thought they the 2 jabs would immunise us for life. They was never the message. However, people are disappointed and in some cases angry or growing in mistrust because the 2 doses was positioned as the way out. While careful to never say “life time immunity” it was heavily implied this was job done. People who pointed out that as Corona is a virus and Viruses mutate and so regular ongoing boosters would be required, were initially labelled conspiracy nuts. However, over time a gradual shift in narrative has normalised the acceptance of ongoing boosters (although to be more accurate, like Flu, because of mutation it is not strictly a booster it needs to be a revised vaccine to address mutations/strains). (Not you) implying that people misunderstood what was really meant is incredibly disingenuous. Most people only see/read/hear the headlines and back then it was the miracle cure. While the vaccines have worked wonders short term, they have fallen short of what many people believe they were sold and continue to do so with what appears to be far higher levels of efficacy drop than originally claimed." Can you remember the early stages of lockdown? The real lockdown? Everything shut, shop shelves empty? Vaccines helped get us out of that situation, and got us to a stage where people are no longer scared of Covid. Instead, people are now becoming complacent about covid ... it’s just a sniffle, it’s just a cold, we didn’t need the jabs anyway, don’t need any more jabs etc. Complacency is now our biggest enemy, some people seriously suggesting that we abandon vaccines and restrictions and hope for the best. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This seems to have gone the way of pretty much all threads in this section with the tribes squabbling and the occasional outlier. With hardliners on either side still sticking to the... "it stops the spread and protects others" or the "it's an experimental gene therapy". We can't undo/redo the decisions of the past, the data or "science" that was used at the time may have been accurate or misrepresented or flat wrong at the time, but either way we can't redo it. We are where we are. All we can do is find the best way forward for this moment. Ideally based on the latest,unbiased, relevant and appropriate data and science (and not alpha variant from 18 months ago) which seems to be changing somewhat away from repeatedly jabbing the world being the only solution. It's encouraging to see people sticking their head above the parapet and have those discussions now. " Being completely wedded to, or opposed to a course of action, often means that you will end up being wrong, even if you were originally right, as circumstances change. Do I think we need to be jabbed forever? I hope not. I hope that the virus weakens sufficiently that that is no longer necessary, maybe ending up like the flu jab, available if you want it. Or maybe treatments will improve, meaning that it is no longer life-threatening if you get it. But to move away from the current strategy, we need a better one, one that is proven. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This seems to have gone the way of pretty much all threads in this section with the tribes squabbling and the occasional outlier. With hardliners on either side still sticking to the... "it stops the spread and protects others" or the "it's an experimental gene therapy". We can't undo/redo the decisions of the past, the data or "science" that was used at the time may have been accurate or misrepresented or flat wrong at the time, but either way we can't redo it. We are where we are. All we can do is find the best way forward for this moment. Ideally based on the latest,unbiased, relevant and appropriate data and science (and not alpha variant from 18 months ago) which seems to be changing somewhat away from repeatedly jabbing the world being the only solution. It's encouraging to see people sticking their head above the parapet and have those discussions now. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Pfizer CEO “We know that the 2 doses of the vaccine offer VERY LIMITED protection IF ANY” Hahaha you’ve all been played. Health professionals now saying we don’t need to boost and offer so many shots…only for the at risk category including elderly. Yes. If you haven’t had the boosters then the original 2 doses (Feb and may last year in my case), have very little benefit at this stage. That does not, however, mean that we have been “played”. That’s like going back the pub you were in last night and complaining because the effects of the beer you had paid for seem to have worn off. Nobody thought they the 2 jabs would immunise us for life. They was never the message. However, people are disappointed and in some cases angry or growing in mistrust because the 2 doses was positioned as the way out. While careful to never say “life time immunity” it was heavily implied this was job done. People who pointed out that as Corona is a virus and Viruses mutate and so regular ongoing boosters would be required, were initially labelled conspiracy nuts. However, over time a gradual shift in narrative has normalised the acceptance of ongoing boosters (although to be more accurate, like Flu, because of mutation it is not strictly a booster it needs to be a revised vaccine to address mutations/strains). (Not you) implying that people misunderstood what was really meant is incredibly disingenuous. Most people only see/read/hear the headlines and back then it was the miracle cure. While the vaccines have worked wonders short term, they have fallen short of what many people believe they were sold and continue to do so with what appears to be far higher levels of efficacy drop than originally claimed. Can you remember the early stages of lockdown? The real lockdown? Everything shut, shop shelves empty? Vaccines helped get us out of that situation, and got us to a stage where people are no longer scared of Covid. Instead, people are now becoming complacent about covid ... it’s just a sniffle, it’s just a cold, we didn’t need the jabs anyway, don’t need any more jabs etc. Complacency is now our biggest enemy, some people seriously suggesting that we abandon vaccines and restrictions and hope for the best. " I agree complacency is our biggest enemy and the irony is that much of the complacency has been driven by vaccines. Prior to Omicron there were plenty (not all clearly and cannot quantify beyond personal experience and observation) of double jabbed walking around like they were invincible. Many were totally oblivious (or didn’t care) that they could still be carrying/spreading/transmitting Covid. Seemingly unaware that as the vaccine dramatically reduced symptoms they might not in fact even know they had it and therefore not test and not take any other mitigating actions. The irony is that due to the sheer number of vaccinated people and then amongst them a significant proportion who threw caution to the wind, it actually helps to drive up infection rates. I don’t know the way forward but I too hope Covid continues to evolve to increasingly less dangerous strains. If it does then a focus on vaccinating the vulnerable as a priority with optional/personal choice (with no societal restrictions or vilification) for everyone else (like annual Flu jab) would be favourable (to me anyway). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Pfizer CEO “We know that the 2 doses of the vaccine offer VERY LIMITED protection IF ANY” Hahaha you’ve all been played. Health professionals now saying we don’t need to boost and offer so many shots…only for the at risk category including elderly. Yes. If you haven’t had the boosters then the original 2 doses (Feb and may last year in my case), have very little benefit at this stage. That does not, however, mean that we have been “played”. That’s like going back the pub you were in last night and complaining because the effects of the beer you had paid for seem to have worn off. Nobody thought they the 2 jabs would immunise us for life. They was never the message. However, people are disappointed and in some cases angry or growing in mistrust because the 2 doses was positioned as the way out. While careful to never say “life time immunity” it was heavily implied this was job done. People who pointed out that as Corona is a virus and Viruses mutate and so regular ongoing boosters would be required, were initially labelled conspiracy nuts. However, over time a gradual shift in narrative has normalised the acceptance of ongoing boosters (although to be more accurate, like Flu, because of mutation it is not strictly a booster it needs to be a revised vaccine to address mutations/strains). (Not you) implying that people misunderstood what was really meant is incredibly disingenuous. Most people only see/read/hear the headlines and back then it was the miracle cure. While the vaccines have worked wonders short term, they have fallen short of what many people believe they were sold and continue to do so with what appears to be far higher levels of efficacy drop than originally claimed. Can you remember the early stages of lockdown? The real lockdown? Everything shut, shop shelves empty? Vaccines helped get us out of that situation, and got us to a stage where people are no longer scared of Covid. Instead, people are now becoming complacent about covid ... it’s just a sniffle, it’s just a cold, we didn’t need the jabs anyway, don’t need any more jabs etc. Complacency is now our biggest enemy, some people seriously suggesting that we abandon vaccines and restrictions and hope for the best. I agree complacency is our biggest enemy and the irony is that much of the complacency has been driven by vaccines. Prior to Omicron there were plenty (not all clearly and cannot quantify beyond personal experience and observation) of double jabbed walking around like they were invincible. Many were totally oblivious (or didn’t care) that they could still be carrying/spreading/transmitting Covid. Seemingly unaware that as the vaccine dramatically reduced symptoms they might not in fact even know they had it and therefore not test and not take any other mitigating actions. The irony is that due to the sheer number of vaccinated people and then amongst them a significant proportion who threw caution to the wind, it actually helps to drive up infection rates. I don’t know the way forward but I too hope Covid continues to evolve to increasingly less dangerous strains. If it does then a focus on vaccinating the vulnerable as a priority with optional/personal choice (with no societal restrictions or vilification) for everyone else (like annual Flu jab) would be favourable (to me anyway)." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Pfizer CEO “We know that the 2 doses of the vaccine offer VERY LIMITED protection IF ANY” Hahaha you’ve all been played. Health professionals now saying we don’t need to boost and offer so many shots…only for the at risk category including elderly. Yes. If you haven’t had the boosters then the original 2 doses (Feb and may last year in my case), have very little benefit at this stage. That does not, however, mean that we have been “played”. That’s like going back the pub you were in last night and complaining because the effects of the beer you had paid for seem to have worn off. Nobody thought they the 2 jabs would immunise us for life. They was never the message. However, people are disappointed and in some cases angry or growing in mistrust because the 2 doses was positioned as the way out. While careful to never say “life time immunity” it was heavily implied this was job done. People who pointed out that as Corona is a virus and Viruses mutate and so regular ongoing boosters would be required, were initially labelled conspiracy nuts. However, over time a gradual shift in narrative has normalised the acceptance of ongoing boosters (although to be more accurate, like Flu, because of mutation it is not strictly a booster it needs to be a revised vaccine to address mutations/strains). (Not you) implying that people misunderstood what was really meant is incredibly disingenuous. Most people only see/read/hear the headlines and back then it was the miracle cure. While the vaccines have worked wonders short term, they have fallen short of what many people believe they were sold and continue to do so with what appears to be far higher levels of efficacy drop than originally claimed. Can you remember the early stages of lockdown? The real lockdown? Everything shut, shop shelves empty? Vaccines helped get us out of that situation, and got us to a stage where people are no longer scared of Covid. Instead, people are now becoming complacent about covid ... it’s just a sniffle, it’s just a cold, we didn’t need the jabs anyway, don’t need any more jabs etc. Complacency is now our biggest enemy, some people seriously suggesting that we abandon vaccines and restrictions and hope for the best. " There are plenty of people who are still scared of COVID. And the current variant is basically just a cold... No one (or very few people) is saying we didn't need vaccines or we should abandon them. We're just saying that jabbing everyone every 3 months is not sustainable and that we need to move towards a situation like the flu where we offer annual jabs every winter and live with it. Unless you want restrictions forever? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own" Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Pfizer CEO “We know that the 2 doses of the vaccine offer VERY LIMITED protection IF ANY” Hahaha you’ve all been played. Health professionals now saying we don’t need to boost and offer so many shots…only for the at risk category including elderly. Yes. If you haven’t had the boosters then the original 2 doses (Feb and may last year in my case), have very little benefit at this stage. That does not, however, mean that we have been “played”. That’s like going back the pub you were in last night and complaining because the effects of the beer you had paid for seem to have worn off. Nobody thought they the 2 jabs would immunise us for life. They was never the message. However, people are disappointed and in some cases angry or growing in mistrust because the 2 doses was positioned as the way out. While careful to never say “life time immunity” it was heavily implied this was job done. People who pointed out that as Corona is a virus and Viruses mutate and so regular ongoing boosters would be required, were initially labelled conspiracy nuts. However, over time a gradual shift in narrative has normalised the acceptance of ongoing boosters (although to be more accurate, like Flu, because of mutation it is not strictly a booster it needs to be a revised vaccine to address mutations/strains). (Not you) implying that people misunderstood what was really meant is incredibly disingenuous. Most people only see/read/hear the headlines and back then it was the miracle cure. While the vaccines have worked wonders short term, they have fallen short of what many people believe they were sold and continue to do so with what appears to be far higher levels of efficacy drop than originally claimed. Can you remember the early stages of lockdown? The real lockdown? Everything shut, shop shelves empty? Vaccines helped get us out of that situation, and got us to a stage where people are no longer scared of Covid. Instead, people are now becoming complacent about covid ... it’s just a sniffle, it’s just a cold, we didn’t need the jabs anyway, don’t need any more jabs etc. Complacency is now our biggest enemy, some people seriously suggesting that we abandon vaccines and restrictions and hope for the best. There are plenty of people who are still scared of COVID. And the current variant is basically just a cold... No one (or very few people) is saying we didn't need vaccines or we should abandon them. We're just saying that jabbing everyone every 3 months is not sustainable and that we need to move towards a situation like the flu where we offer annual jabs every winter and live with it. Unless you want restrictions forever?" Why would you suggest that I want restrictions forever? Have you read my posts? Why would you try to misrepresent my thoughts like that? It gets us nowhere. Re abandoning jabs, open your eyes. A vocal minority see jabs as some sort of infringement of their civil liberties, and see restrictions / precautions in the same way, and they clearly advocate the abolition of vaccines and restrictions. As I have posted several times, once we have a proven better strategy to move to, jabs are our best option. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up"." Posts like this achieve nothing except maybe more polarisation. You added the words "wishing death on other people" and those are your words not the words from the post you quoted. The words you quoted whether you like them or not are verifiable facts, yours are just ... Well ... I leave it there As for "experimental medical procedure" that just shows total ignorance of what's going on around you and you should quote more reliable sources. Happy new year | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up"." “You lot”? 1 poster. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up". Posts like this achieve nothing except maybe more polarisation. You added the words "wishing death on other people" and those are your words not the words from the post you quoted. The words you quoted whether you like them or not are verifiable facts, yours are just ... Well ... I leave it there As for "experimental medical procedure" that just shows total ignorance of what's going on around you and you should quote more reliable sources. Happy new year" Well said. And a happy new year to you too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This seems to have gone the way of pretty much all threads in this section with the tribes squabbling and the occasional outlier. With hardliners on either side still sticking to the... "it stops the spread and protects others" or the "it's an experimental gene therapy". We can't undo/redo the decisions of the past, the data or "science" that was used at the time may have been accurate or misrepresented or flat wrong at the time, but either way we can't redo it. We are where we are. All we can do is find the best way forward for this moment. Ideally based on the latest,unbiased, relevant and appropriate data and science (and not alpha variant from 18 months ago) which seems to be changing somewhat away from repeatedly jabbing the world being the only solution. It's encouraging to see people sticking their head above the parapet and have those discussions now. Being completely wedded to, or opposed to a course of action, often means that you will end up being wrong, even if you were originally right, as circumstances change. Do I think we need to be jabbed forever? I hope not. I hope that the virus weakens sufficiently that that is no longer necessary, maybe ending up like the flu jab, available if you want it. Or maybe treatments will improve, meaning that it is no longer life-threatening if you get it. But to move away from the current strategy, we need a better one, one that is proven. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up"." Well yes indeed... And perhaps also look at the real data from the icnarc report rather than the soundbites that are agenda driven... That agenda being to further vilify people who have yet to have 1 2 or 3 jabs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up". Well yes indeed... And perhaps also look at the real data from the icnarc report rather than the soundbites that are agenda driven... That agenda being to further vilify people who have yet to have 1 2 or 3 jabs. " Interesting that you call out the “agenda” of “vilifying” people who have not been vaccinated, but nothing to say about the last gauge that is being used against those who support getting vaccinated. Accusations of “tyranny”, comparisons to nazi German etc. Surely we can agree that all belligerent and insulting dialogue is unproductive and unhelpful? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up". Well yes indeed... And perhaps also look at the real data from the icnarc report rather than the soundbites that are agenda driven... That agenda being to further vilify people who have yet to have 1 2 or 3 jabs. Interesting that you call out the “agenda” of “vilifying” people who have not been vaccinated, but nothing to say about the last gauge that is being used against those who support getting vaccinated. Accusations of “tyranny”, comparisons to nazi German etc. Surely we can agree that all belligerent and insulting dialogue is unproductive and unhelpful? " Yes absolutely. That does nothing for the debate at all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up". Posts like this achieve nothing except maybe more polarisation. You added the words "wishing death on other people" and those are your words not the words from the post you quoted. The words you quoted whether you like them or not are verifiable facts, yours are just ... Well ... I leave it there As for "experimental medical procedure" that just shows total ignorance of what's going on around you and you should quote more reliable sources. Happy new year" Hold on, and to be fair, the post they responded to said: “Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own” I think someone saying “ideally their own” IS wishing death on people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Simple - vaccine refusniks are clogging up IC units and preventing treatment of others who need IC care and ARE vaccinated. Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own Wishing death on other people because they've chosen not to take an experimental medical procedure - you lot are so caring and compassionate. Define "clogging up". Posts like this achieve nothing except maybe more polarisation. You added the words "wishing death on other people" and those are your words not the words from the post you quoted. The words you quoted whether you like them or not are verifiable facts, yours are just ... Well ... I leave it there As for "experimental medical procedure" that just shows total ignorance of what's going on around you and you should quote more reliable sources. Happy new year Hold on, and to be fair, the post they responded to said: “Anti vaccination = pro death, ideally their own” I think someone saying “ideally their own” IS wishing death on people." Yeah, sorry of. He is saying that their actions will result in death, hopefully their own. Ie, if someone is going to die due to their actions, he hopes it is them. That is different to an outright wish of death against them. It’s like saying that if a d*unk driver kills someone, hopefully they kill themselves, rather than outright hoping that all d*unk drivers kill themselves. An ugly sentiment, expressed clumsily. Doesn’t help. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And there's a lot of hate going round too" No hate. Just pointing out facts when needed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
