Covid Booster. Yes/No? *** The Covid Thread ***

[PDQ Mobile]

^^
Slowster
I object to your use of insinuating.
I am not insinuating anything at all.

I simply find it strange that a group of educated front line staff should so chose.
And I wonder why.

"London hospital staff" is probably not only people with medical education. It may well include a lot of clerical and manual workers who are vulnerable to the same sort of misinformation and misdirection as many others.

Best tell them then.
....

I am out. Too contentious.

[[XAP]Bob]

I’d be much more positive if the suggestion was for them having LFTs every morning though…

Who is "them"?

Fairly clear from the context you have snipped.

“Them” is the people who are unable to be vaccinated…
The number of people for which that applies is small, and isn’t a matter of choice. I therefore find the concept of severely restricting their freedoms unpalatable and unnecessary - I don’t see additional LFTs as a restriction, but as a sensible additional precaution.

Note that I say this as someone who is extremely vulnerable… so not an entirely disinterested party.

Having a total lockdown applied to those who *choose* not to be vaccinated would be reasonable.

[mjr]

^^
Slowster
I object to your use of insinuating.
I am not insinuating anything at all.

I simply find it strange that a group of educated front line staff should so chose.
And I wonder why.

"London hospital staff" is probably not only people with medical education. It may well include a lot of clerical and manual workers who are vulnerable to the same sort of misinformation and misdirection as many others.

Best tell them then.
....

I'm sure people are.

I am out. Too contentious.

Does that mean you won't when consider explanations that don't fit anti-vaccine theories, eh?

[[XAP]Bob]

Given a population rate of 83% a hospital staff rate of 90% is above that… and some of those staff won’t be front line.

[Psamathe]

.... and I’d be absolutely for making the vaccine compulsory - with appropriate exemptions for those who cannot take it (I am unaware of any religious objections).

I mostly agree. I'd probably go for much stronger constraints for those who were not vaccinated/genuinely exempt - in effect "strict lockdown" (with no bubbles) even including anti-vax tennis stars.

Ian

I’m not convinced that is necessary - the affected people are not affected by choice, and are so few in number that their movement is unlikely to make a noticeable difference in infection rates (assuming of course that other sensible measures are taken).

I’d be much more positive if the suggestion was for them having LFTs every morning though…

I think we were talking cross-purposes. I was suggesting stronger constraints for those who have no reason not to be vaccinated (i.e. those anti-vaxers/sceptics/can't be bothered). Those who genuinely can't be vaccinated would be treated as exempt with whatever additional protections their medics thought appropriate to their condition.

Ian

[[XAP]Bob]

Ah, yes - I read "not vaccinated" OR "genuinely exempt" rather than "not" "vaccinated OR genuinely exempt".

[mjr]

Cunning Plan to Cut Next Winter's Case Numbers Revealed: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/end- ... -3bpz8lnqf

[Psamathe]

Cunning Plan to Cut Next Winter's Case Numbers Revealed: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/end- ... -3bpz8lnqf

Lots of politicians spending airtime talking about "living with Covid" (those with O-levels using words like "endemic"). To my mind, before we can start "living with Covid" we need an NHS that can cope with medical conditions other than Covid (ideally in a timely manner).

Also, "living with Covid" rather suggests a degree of viral stability. Undoubtedly new variants will appear and they may or may not be less severe. We've only had Omicron for a short time and with large parts of the world largely unvaccinated plus high virus numbers even in the UK lots of sources for variants (and not necessarily mutations from Omicron) so a bit early to start closing down critical infrastructure built-up at vast cost to us all, when we were overcharged because Ministers suddenly realised they'd run down what was now crucial (plus opportunities for their mates to make loads of profit).

Ian

[PDQ Mobile]

I’d be much more positive if the suggestion was for them having LFTs every morning though…

Who is "them"?

Fairly clear from the context you have snipped.

“Them” is the people who are unable to be vaccinated…
The number of people for which that applies is small, and isn’t a matter of choice. I therefore find the concept of severely restricting their freedoms unpalatable and unnecessary - I don’t see additional LFTs as a restriction, but as a sensible additional precaution.

Note that I say this as someone who is extremely vulnerable… so not an entirely disinterested party.

Having a total lockdown applied to those who *choose* not to be vaccinated would be reasonable.

The context was this, from you, actually

".... and I’d be absolutely for making the vaccine compulsory - with appropriate exemptions for those who cannot take it (I am unaware of any religious objections"

That's how I read it and thought who you meant by those (them).

And I disagree with the idea.

But sorry if I got the drift wrong.

[PDQ Mobile]

Does that mean you won't when consider explanations that don't fit anti-vaccine theories, eh?

Snip only for brevity.


Does someone that is anti compulsion have to always be construed as anti- vaccine?
Or a mole?
It is that aspect and worse in the media that really troubles me

I am pro freedom of choice on vaccination.

There are some things about the whole sorry episode that sometimes seem not to add up.
The high new infection numbers against the high vaccination rates,for example.

I am vaccinated and boostered.
I believed it would protect me, sorry keep me "a lot safer" perhaps it has.
Although I seem to remember early on in the pandemic, protection, was a word often used.

Today I met two people, say around 50, both fully vaccinated/boostered, and they had both been been pretty poorly with Covid.

I also know people within a single family, one parent vaccinated and the other not.
In their 40's.
They caught it from their school age children. They both had very very similar outcomes, quite poorly and left tired afterwards.

My experience is very limited though wider than two examples.

But London health service staff's experience is not after two years surely?
I am sure people have been "telling" them at length about "misinformation" and "misdirection".
I thought those remarks condescending.

This is not some sort of anti-vaccine diatribe just a few simple observations.

On another thread, a normally notably moderate and liberal contributor wrote:-
""could be meat and drink to the anti-vax brigade, with their campaigns of violence and intimidation"".

I have to say I thought it over the top.

There are a few people who go to extremes in all walks of life but most people just register their unease in more civilised terms. It may not be "politically" correct of course.

It is the lumping of all into the same "dangerous" boat that sets off my warning antenna.

[Jdsk]

There are some things about the whole sorry episode that sometimes seem not to add up.
The high new infection numbers against the high vaccination rates,for example.

What is less clear is how much full vaccination prevents virus spread?
It seems to me given the high levels of vaccination in the UK and the astonishingly high levels of new (Omicron) infections, not so very much.

What's your estimate of what the rate of new infections would be without vaccination, please?

But transposing those figures then a maximum of a third more??

So you think that the rate of infection would be up to a third more without vaccination but the numbers don't add up.

What model are you using where this "doesn't add up"?

What do you suspect is the cause of it "not adding up"?

Thanks

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

Today I met two people, say around 50, both fully vaccinated/boostered, and they had both been been pretty poorly with Covid.

I also know people within a single family, one parent vaccinated and the other not.
In their 40's.
They caught it from their school age children. They both had very very similar outcomes, quite poorly and left tired afterwards.

My experience is very limited though wider than two examples.

Nobody has said that vaccination offers total protection from any of the adverse outcomes.

What's the purpose of quoting these anecdotes, please?

Because I read it as spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about the effectiveness of vaccination. Again.

Jonathan

[[XAP]Bob]

I’m pro freedom of choice on speed limits…

Vaccination in the face of a pandemic is not something for which there is a modicum of doubt.

[[XAP]Bob]

Who is "them"?

Fairly clear from the context you have snipped.

“Them” is the people who are unable to be vaccinated…
The number of people for which that applies is small, and isn’t a matter of choice. I therefore find the concept of severely restricting their freedoms unpalatable and unnecessary - I don’t see additional LFTs as a restriction, but as a sensible additional precaution.

Note that I say this as someone who is extremely vulnerable… so not an entirely disinterested party.

Having a total lockdown applied to those who *choose* not to be vaccinated would be reasonable.

The context was this, from you, actually

".... and I’d be absolutely for making the vaccine compulsory - with appropriate exemptions for those who cannot take it (I am unaware of any religious objections"

That's how I read it and thought who you meant by those (them).

And I disagree with the idea.

But sorry if I got the drift wrong.

Can’t even find the original post now - doesn’t matter

The affected people are the them. No need to impose severe restrictions on a very small population (which isn’t self selecting) when daily LFTs will accomplish enough in that small population (when accompanied with distancing, masks etc etc).

Impose whatever you like on those who think that somehow you can’t catch the virus from people you know (HMG); or that the moon landings caused autism.

[Psamathe]

Interesting risk table from an article in The Conversation

Here’s where (and how) you are most likely to catch COVID – new study

Risk of catching COVID. Author [of The Conversation article linked above] provided

Ian