The big Coronavirus thread

Ben6899

rick_chasey said:

It's an unprovable theory, so I'm not gonna die on it...

You're really embracing this New Year's Resolution. It's good to see.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

It's an unprovable theory, so I'm not gonna die on it, but I am of the view that the "noisy minority" trope is absolutely in force when it comes to anti-vaxxers.

Vast majority of people are vaxxed - pretty much everyone wants no restrictions, pretty much everyone can link unvaxxed people dying so much we might have to have restrictions again.

It's not rocket science. We're all laughing at djokovic.

That’s not what is pushing hospitals to breaking point.

rick_chasey

Clogging up hospitals?

Pedants aside, you get the idea.

Anyway, that's my theory.

TheBigBean

I don't think it would be popular. Not how it's done in the UK.

Jezyboy

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

kingstongraham

Jezyboy said:

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

If there were no unvaccinated around, would the vaccinated need to isolate?

wallace_and_gromit

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

It's an unprovable theory, so I'm not gonna die on it, but I am of the view that the "noisy minority" trope is absolutely in force when it comes to anti-vaxxers.

Vast majority of people are vaxxed - pretty much everyone wants no restrictions, pretty much everyone can link unvaxxed people dying so much we might have to have restrictions again.

It's not rocket science. We're all laughing at djokovic.

That’s not what is pushing hospitals to breaking point.

It's the Covid protocols in hospitals and isolation requirements to control infections to keep serious cases manageable that are pushing hospitals to breaking point.

If everyone (*) was vaxxed then the risk of cases being serious would be much reduced, and the protocols and mass isolations wouldn't be necessary.

(*) where vaccination is advised.

rick_chasey

Lol at the "not how the UK does it" or "how it is done in the UK"

Nonsense, but whatever. 1853 - compulsory vaccination of children against smallpox

British exceptionalism is always a bad look.

DeVlaeminck

I just think saying we want to make life hard for the unvaccinated :
- alienates anyone with reservations about the vaccination - that will include some that have had it.
- plays into the perception that Labour like to interfere in ordinary people's lives - big govt
- maybe makes them think they'd introduce more Covid restrictions.
- upsets those who see freedom of choice as a principle.
- looks a bit unstatesmanlike.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

Lol at the "not how the UK does it" or "how it is done in the UK"

Nonsense, but whatever. 1853 - compulsory vaccination of children against smallpox

British exceptionalism is always a bad look.

It's not unique to the UK.

Do you think things might have changed since 1853?

Jezyboy

kingstongraham said:

Jezyboy said:

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

If there were no unvaccinated around, would the vaccinated need to isolate?

I suspect it would vary ward to ward.

Young double/triple vaxxed guy in for falling off his bike and breaking his collarbone should be fine to catch a mild dose from staff.

Older overweight triple vaxxed cancer patient, possibly not so much.

rick_chasey

Whatever. From my own readings about other pandemics, I'm always comforted by the first rule of history which is people never change, and the reactions to the plague, Spanish flu, etc are all remarkably similar to now. It's the same arguments and debates, albeit with much much much higher death rates (something I think we all take too much for granted).

I'm surprised the disagreement is cultural, "not how it's done in the UK" > the UK hasn't had a problem like this since 1918 but anyway.

I'm not here to persuade people, but I shall defend my own position

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

Clogging up hospitals?

Pedants aside, you get the idea.

Anyway, that's my theory.

It's not pedantry: the issue this winter is very different. There is relatively less pressure on ICU, but there are far more Covid +ve patients (regardless of vaccination status and reason for admission) who need to be treated separately from other patients AND there is a greater shortage of staff due to +ve cases in staff AND hospitals are trying to catch up on the huge backlog of treatment postponed from last winter/spring at the same time AND everyone has rediscovered A&E.

The unvaccinated are a relatively small part of the problem.

I'm also not sure how further restrictions would help at this stage, when the problem is the underlying lack of hospital capacity.

john80

rick_chasey said:

Have we done the Macron saying the quiet bit out loud; that he wants to “p!ss off the unvaccinated”??

I’d love Starmer to do the same. Massive vote winner, backs BoJo in a corner.

Do we not have vaccination rates up in the levels we have for pretty much everything else. Assuming this is the case I can't really see beyond specific occupational safety reasons a need to go and actively annoy this minority. Lets face it we need some examples of people refusing to be vaccinated to keep the Darwin awards going and I think the levels of the unvacinnated are not driving the problem. I don't think this would be the vote winner you think it is. I can't think of anything worse that living under a woke, Labour government that thinks it can manage risk better than you. Why stop at the antivaxxers, why not dictate the percentage asset split of your pension fund and a host of other issues you could mandate for no particular gain as they know best.

pblakeney

Jezyboy said:

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

Limited benefits like not being admitted to ICU?

rick_chasey

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Have we done the Macron saying the quiet bit out loud; that he wants to “p!ss off the unvaccinated”??

I’d love Starmer to do the same. Massive vote winner, backs BoJo in a corner.

Do we not have vaccination rates up in the levels we have for pretty much everything else. Assuming this is the case I can't really see beyond specific occupational safety reasons a need to go and actively annoy this minority. Lets face it we need some examples of people refusing to be vaccinated to keep the Darwin awards going and I think the levels of the unvacinnated are not driving the problem. I don't think this would be the vote winner you think it is. I can't think of anything worse that living under a woke, Labour government that thinks it can manage risk better than you. Why stop at the antivaxxers, why not dictate the percentage asset split of your pension fund and a host of other issues you could mandate for no particular gain as they know best.

I guess when you have nationalised healthcare, then healthcare is part of the state mandate, and vaccinations are are a critical part of public health.

It's not a free market where your hospitals can chose not to help the unvaccinated, right?

john80

rick_chasey said:

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Have we done the Macron saying the quiet bit out loud; that he wants to “p!ss off the unvaccinated”??

I’d love Starmer to do the same. Massive vote winner, backs BoJo in a corner.

Do we not have vaccination rates up in the levels we have for pretty much everything else. Assuming this is the case I can't really see beyond specific occupational safety reasons a need to go and actively annoy this minority. Lets face it we need some examples of people refusing to be vaccinated to keep the Darwin awards going and I think the levels of the unvacinnated are not driving the problem. I don't think this would be the vote winner you think it is. I can't think of anything worse that living under a woke, Labour government that thinks it can manage risk better than you. Why stop at the antivaxxers, why not dictate the percentage asset split of your pension fund and a host of other issues you could mandate for no particular gain as they know best.

I guess when you have nationalised healthcare, then healthcare is part of the state mandate, and vaccinations are are a critical part of public health.

It's not a free market where your hospitals can chose not to help the unvaccinated, right?

The problem is that you are assuming that the unvaccinated say 10% are the cause of the problem. From what I see it is freely spreading between vaccinated people that are even boostered. So the argument that the world would be normal if that 10% stopped being idiots is in my view entirely false. If you have evidence that clearly states that we would need no restrictions if we put all the antivaxxers in a camp till they got vaccinated then hey I might agree with you. But beyond that I think we are pretty much in the flu camp here. Get vaccinated if you think it will be a problem for you and if you don't you don't have to. Covid is just going to be a slightly more tilted argument as the potential seriousness is a bit more likely hence why I have a covid vaccine but no flu jab.

rjsterry

kingstongraham said:

Jezyboy said:

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

If there were no unvaccinated around, would the vaccinated need to isolate?

Yes. Lots of people in hospital have severely compromised immune systems. And almost by definition, the patients in hospital will be more vulnerable to Covid than the general population. Hospitals are also really great places for spreading respiratory infections.

I don't see it as that different from having to be tested for MRSA before going into hospital to get my finger screwed back together.

kingstongraham

rjsterry said:

kingstongraham said:

Jezyboy said:

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

If there were no unvaccinated around, would the vaccinated need to isolate?

Yes. Lots of people in hospital have severely compromised immune systems. And almost by definition, the patients in hospital will be more vulnerable to Covid than the general population. Hospitals are also really great places for spreading respiratory infections.

I don't see it as that different from having to be tested for MRSA before going into hospital to get my finger screwed back together.

But you don't need to get tested for MRSA before leaving the house to go to the cinema.

Vaccinated people would not be able to do certain jobs while infected.

TheBigBean

I said upthread, I just can't get that excited by unvaccinated people.

imposter2.0

TheBigBean said:

Do you think things might have changed since 1853?

Certainly, the internet wasn't nearly as widespread back then as it is now...

rjsterry

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

kingstongraham said:

Jezyboy said:

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

If there were no unvaccinated around, would the vaccinated need to isolate?

Yes. Lots of people in hospital have severely compromised immune systems. And almost by definition, the patients in hospital will be more vulnerable to Covid than the general population. Hospitals are also really great places for spreading respiratory infections.

I don't see it as that different from having to be tested for MRSA before going into hospital to get my finger screwed back together.

But you don't need to get tested for MRSA before leaving the house to go to the cinema.

Vaccinated people would not be able to do certain jobs while infected.

I thought we were just talking about pressure on hospitals. Nobody is proposing requiring vaccination to leave the house. It's up to cinemas what they do.

kingstonian

rick_chasey said:

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Have we done the Macron saying the quiet bit out loud; that he wants to “p!ss off the unvaccinated”??

I’d love Starmer to do the same. Massive vote winner, backs BoJo in a corner.

Do we not have vaccination rates up in the levels we have for pretty much everything else. Assuming this is the case I can't really see beyond specific occupational safety reasons a need to go and actively annoy this minority. Lets face it we need some examples of people refusing to be vaccinated to keep the Darwin awards going and I think the levels of the unvacinnated are not driving the problem. I don't think this would be the vote winner you think it is. I can't think of anything worse that living under a woke, Labour government that thinks it can manage risk better than you. Why stop at the antivaxxers, why not dictate the percentage asset split of your pension fund and a host of other issues you could mandate for no particular gain as they know best.

I guess when you have nationalised healthcare, then healthcare is part of the state mandate, and vaccinations are are a critical part of public health.

It's not a free market where your hospitals can chose not to help the unvaccinated, right?

The principle of the NHS is to provide healthcare free at the point of delivery for all, irrespective of the reason behind why the individual requires that healthcare. So for example, the terrorist that attacked and killed a police officer at Westminster a few years ago was subsequently shot multiple times by another officer, and paramedics tried to save his life (unsuccessfully). The morality of how he had been injured was put to one side, the paramedics did everything they could to try to save him. Same for drink drivers, people overdosing on illegal drugs, and so on. I wouldn’t want any govnt to seek to change that.

kingstongraham

rjsterry said:

kingstongraham said:

rjsterry said:

kingstongraham said:

Jezyboy said:

I think it's too risky a strategy.

It might be a pandemic of the unvaccinated in terms of ICU admissions, but in terms of catching it and having to isolate, the vaccine seems to offer only limited benefits.

If there were no unvaccinated around, would the vaccinated need to isolate?

Yes. Lots of people in hospital have severely compromised immune systems. And almost by definition, the patients in hospital will be more vulnerable to Covid than the general population. Hospitals are also really great places for spreading respiratory infections.

I don't see it as that different from having to be tested for MRSA before going into hospital to get my finger screwed back together.

But you don't need to get tested for MRSA before leaving the house to go to the cinema.

Vaccinated people would not be able to do certain jobs while infected.

I thought we were just talking about pressure on hospitals. Nobody is proposing requiring vaccination to leave the house. It's up to cinemas what they do.

I think you misunderstand me. Currently, if you catch it and are vaccinated, you need to stay at home and cannot go to the cinema because of that.

Pross

TheBigBean said:

I don't think it would be popular. Not how it's done in the UK.

I don't think it would get a like from one of the forum lurkers that's for sure.

Pross

rick_chasey said:

It's an unprovable theory, so I'm not gonna die on it, but I am of the view that the "noisy minority" trope is absolutely in force when it comes to anti-vaxxers.

Vast majority of people are vaxxed - pretty much everyone wants no restrictions, pretty much everyone can link unvaxxed people dying so much we might have to have restrictions again.

It's not rocket science. We're all laughing at djokovic.

My unprovable theory is that there is a large crossover between the voters that defected to support the Tories at the last election and those that refuse the vaccine and they are the votes that need to be won back.

rick_chasey

kingstonian said:

rick_chasey said:

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Have we done the Macron saying the quiet bit out loud; that he wants to “p!ss off the unvaccinated”??

I’d love Starmer to do the same. Massive vote winner, backs BoJo in a corner.

Do we not have vaccination rates up in the levels we have for pretty much everything else. Assuming this is the case I can't really see beyond specific occupational safety reasons a need to go and actively annoy this minority. Lets face it we need some examples of people refusing to be vaccinated to keep the Darwin awards going and I think the levels of the unvacinnated are not driving the problem. I don't think this would be the vote winner you think it is. I can't think of anything worse that living under a woke, Labour government that thinks it can manage risk better than you. Why stop at the antivaxxers, why not dictate the percentage asset split of your pension fund and a host of other issues you could mandate for no particular gain as they know best.

I guess when you have nationalised healthcare, then healthcare is part of the state mandate, and vaccinations are are a critical part of public health.

It's not a free market where your hospitals can chose not to help the unvaccinated, right?

The principle of the NHS is to provide healthcare free at the point of delivery for all, irrespective of the reason behind why the individual requires that healthcare. So for example, the terrorist that attacked and killed a police officer at Westminster a few years ago was subsequently shot multiple times by another officer, and paramedics tried to save his life (unsuccessfully). The morality of how he had been injured was put to one side, the paramedics did everything they could to try to save him. Same for drink drivers, people overdosing on illegal drugs, and so on. I wouldn’t want any govnt to seek to change that.

Thanks for that irrelevant explanation of stuff we all know. Especially helpful as I have on this very thread explained the triage morality dilemma and the solution multiple times.

Anything else you wanna share? Did you know that any particle of matter in the universe attracts any other with a force varying directly as the product of the masses and inversely as the square of the distance between them?

Anyway,

The point I was making was vaccinations are a critical part of public health, right?

And given the point you unnecessarily explained (and was already assumed in my post), then surely it is in the state's best interest from a public health perspective to legislate to make sure the public health is well looked after?

I can't really think of any material drawbacks from having the vaccine, legitimate medical exemptions aside, so other than the right not to have it, which is entirely theoretical, why not make it compulsory, or at least, to avoid mass restrictions, dramatically curb the rights of anti-vaxxers?

briantrumpet

France has taken South Africa off the naughty step.

Stevo_666

Over 20% of the French population are unvaccinated and any who might have voted for him before are unlikely to do so now. He would have to win a lot of votes from the rest of the electorate to make up for that.

rick_chasey

I suspect there are not many macron voters turned anti vaxxers.