Re: Coronavirus
 

well the obvious question then, in such "overwhelming" evidence, is why the need for restrictions in a highly vaccinated population?

Re: Coronavirus
 

We've been through this before but the concern was that Omicron had significant vaccine escape and the vaccine doesn't stop you from getting COVID, it helps reduce the chances of getting COVID, then if that fails it reduces the chances of serious symptoms and so on.

It's all a percentage game but when you're dealing with very high numbers, 67 million people in the UK, then those numbers can add up quickly.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, they can always be given the option to refuse treatment from an unvaccinated member of staff and then drop further behind in the queue to wait for a vaccinated one?

Not sure their issue with it either. They're presumably routine tested to ensure they don't have covid, and may have medical or other reasons not to be vaccinated. And as has already recently been emphasised on here getting vaccinated neither stops you getting or spreading covid anyway.


Definite virtue signalling. They're acting more superior because they're vaccinated.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You can't do virtue signalling unless you have virtues to signal...

Knowing that the vaccine;

• Reduces infection, meaning that you are available to do your job and not isolating
• Reduces symptomatic disease
• Reduces hospitalisation, freeing up NHS resources
• Reduces mortality so there's a good chance they will come back to work
• Reduces transmission, making society safer as a whole

You would have to question someone working in the healthcare field who refused the vaccine, putting themselves and those around them at risk

Re: Coronavirus
 

Minor correction …. You can’t do virtue signalling unless you possess the things perceived as virtuous by your peer group. Which means falling on your sword rather than getting vaccinated is highly virtuous if you’re trying to impress your anti-vax Facebook mates.

Re: Coronavirus
 

And some who spent a life time denying science now see themselves as leading experts in it now they are jabbed.

Re: Coronavirus
 

How many gob shytes, or their families, will complain if they contract covid in hospital from the staff ? :shrug:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

If you turn up to hospital after a car accident and the doctor says your legs hanging off but i can save it, but i haven't had any covid jabs and no other doctor/ surgeon is available, do you want them to proceed with the operation or do you want to stay in the ambulance until you bleed to death :shrug:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, first of all I don't see any reason why the vast majority wouldn't get vaccinated. As you say, even if it doesn't eliminate, it reduces covid outcomes, and reduces them more effectively the more severe the outcome. Protecting others is a sideshow to getting yourself protected but it's all still important.


I don't realistically see why anyone, especially those working in the front line of the NHS, or any job where they are in contact with a lot of people, shouldn't be vaccinated.


Nor do I see the logic in anyone refusing the vaccination unless they have a valid medical or other reason not to.


But, we do not live in a country where vaccination is mandatory, nor should we. People ultimately do have and should have that choice.


NHS workers should be no different from this. It is ultimately their risk if they decline protection against the virus, though there is still the ongoing discussion over the relative protections of having the virus vs vaccination. I would assume at this stage that virus testing, use of PPE, etc, is still being used for anyone (given the immune escape of Omicron vs prior infection).



I guess they could make it a contractual obligation for NHS workers to be vaccinated or have a valid exception and then dismiss the others. But ultimately this move would exacerbate an existing staff shortage which is presumably one reason why it hasn't been done.


And this only goes so far to addressing the view of a patient who is refusing to get treated by an unvaccinated NHS worker. This is virtue signalling as it's projecting your virtue that everyone should be vaccinated, onto someone who you are dealing with, whose vaccination status you have no right to know, and assuming other mitigations are in place to reduce the chance you will get covid from them, no risk to you anyway. Presumably these also apply the no vaccinated rule to bus drivers, delivery drivers, supermarket workers, and anyone else they come into any form of contact in their lives? You are mainly correct, but it still is virtue signalling, amongst other things.



There's nothing wrong with good vaccine takeup but people should stick to their own business.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Would you not have an expectation that going to a hospital whose sole purpose is your good health that staff should take all reasonable efforts to ensure exactly that? It's not protecting your virtue, it's protecting your health.

I am taking my daughter to a hospital appointment this week and if my daughter or I were to get infected from an unvaccinated health provider, should I shrug my shoulders and say that's the price to pay for someone else's freedom?

Re: Coronavirus
 

But it does reduce the chance of you spreading it, or having severe symptoms/being hospitalised.

Not much in this world is 100% effective (for example, even though cars have brakes, there are still car crashes all the time, but I don’t hear a widespread outcry for people to be allowed to not have brakes/seatbelts/airbags in their cars), but surely a reduction in infection/severity is worthwhile. According to your logic, wearing a seatbelt is "virtue signalling".

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/e...lege-hospital/

Re: Coronavirus
 

You could always sue…

Re: Coronavirus
 

No it isn't.


But someone going round banging on doors of cars where people aren't, or drawing overt attention to the fact that they are wearing a seatbelt, would be virtue signalling.


I do understand that the vaccines reduce the risk even if they don't eliminate it...

I'd expect that the hospital would have mitigations in place to ensure that staff or other patients did not spread infectious diseases.


Not just covid, but other infections like norovirus, flu, colds, MRSA, etc etc.


In the case of specifically covid, we know that even vaccinated people can spread it, so the chance of getting from an unvaccinated person exists similarly that the chance of getting it from a vaccinated person does.


So they should be doing daily LFTs, regular PCRs as often as is practical, wearing proper surgical PPE and changing it when it's contaminated, ventilation systems checked, adequate cleaning, it's all part of the jigsaw to keep people safe where there are sick people and germs all over.


I'm pro-vaccination, it's the best way we have out of this, and the best solution we have to stopping people getting covid, but no vaccine is perfect, it's one tactic. So actually, whilst I largely agree with you, they shouldn't be relying on that a staff member is vaccinated to say that this staff member is OK to act without other precautions anyway. And as these precautions would identify if someone is covid positive then they would equally apply to non vaccinated staff. That's sensible really.

Re: Coronavirus
 

But wouldn't reduction of risk be better than the increased possibility of a sick child - suing won't help the child's health.

---------- Post added at 15:17 ---------- Previous post was at 15:15 ----------

1 - have to say, I've not seen anyone going around telling everyone they're vacccinated

2 - You keep posting this, but that does not make it true - being vaccinated reduces the risk of spreading COVID.