Coronavirus

I’d always rather have an injection from a nurse than a GP, same if I had to give a blood sample. They do it much more often and are almost always better at it.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

A foolish decision, imo. If the doctors were true to their oath, they'd put in extra hours yo do the vaccinations rather than stiff the old folk.

Sacrifice the elderly so perfectly healthy young people can get vaccinated for a third time.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Sacrifice the elderly so perfectly healthy young people can get vaccinated for a third time.

It’s apparently perfectly acceptable to ignore/marginalise the vulnerable to allow the majority of society to continue.

---------- Post added at 17:52 ---------- Previous post was at 17:44 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

A foolish decision, imo. If the doctors were true to their oath, they'd put in extra hours yo do the vaccinations rather than stiff the old folk.

Or, we could not have an estimated shortage of forty odd thousand doctors ? Not to mention approximately the same again in nurses

[Taf]

Travellers heading to the UK will now have to have a Covid test before their departure in effort to limit spread of the virus, government has announced.

Health Secretary Sajid Javid said the tightened requirements will come into force from 04:00 on Tuesday.

Travellers will be required to submit evidence of a negative lateral flow or PCR test to enter.

Currently people only need to self-isolate until they test negative within two days of arriving.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59534685

At least a decent measure.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Taf

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59534685

At least a decent measure.

Brits stuck abroad having to pay for two weeks in a hotel at Christmas prices is going to be an entertaining read in the Mail/Express/Telegraph.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Chris

I’d always rather have an injection from a nurse than a GP, same if I had to give a blood sample. They do it much more often and are almost always better at it.

yep, can't remember the last time I had an injection given by a doctor . . . which is why the headline posted by Papa seemed a bit silly . . to me anyway.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by Carth

yep, can't remember the last time I had an injection given by a doctor . . . which is why the headline posted by Papa seemed a bit silly . . to me anyway.

Don't some GPs' practices need nurses with the doctors though in appointments? If the nurses are vaccinating that reduces what they can do there.

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Sacrifice the elderly so perfectly healthy young people can get vaccinated for a third time.

The elderly have been triple jabbed. If evidence shows that younger age groups need that to slow down the virus spreading there and making people ill, then that is the priority. The health checks are after all in people who are not presenting illness, though they are useful as a warning sign of some illnesses.

Originally Posted by jfman

What you call ‘hype’ is grounded scientific analysis.

No, its hype.

---------- Post added at 01:22 ---------- Previous post was at 01:18 ----------

Originally Posted by Carth

All three of my jabs have been administered by a nurse . . . no doctor in sight

All of mine have been done by whoever is working at the vaccination centre.
I'm pretty sure none of them were doctors, so probably nurses, I never asked.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Paul

No, its hype.

Absolutely. Those who claim that all these decisions are based on the science and use this to justify emergency measures of whatever description happily ignore that principle when rushing to tighten the screws when a new variant comes along ‘just in case’.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Absolutely. Those who claim that all these decisions are based on the science and use this to justify emergency measures of whatever description happily ignore that principle when rushing to tighten the screws when a new variant comes along ‘just in case’.

Rubbish Old Boy. Hype doesn’t put people in hospital.

Your preference to deny the threat of variants is irrelevant to reality and scientific consensus, but that’s not novel.

We’ve got a track record of ignoring the inevitability of restrictions and reacting too late. So to claim that those advocating the precautionary principle are somehow controlling policy making is palpable nonsense.

We can see the reality on the ground in Gauteng - infections rising exponentially and hospitalisation following. We need a better rationale for it not happening here than British exceptionalism or luck. Then again as your opposition to restrictions is neither grounded in public health - or the economy (still waiting for your proposals to support hospitality as people act with caution) - it’s unsurprising you fail to consider reality in reaching the same conclusion you have done for almost two years now.

Hence your increasing absurd claims that scientists and communists are conspiring to control people but fail to answer the fundamental questions of any conspiracy theory. Why? To what end? Who benefits?

[OLD BOY]

Vaccines, my dear chap, vaccines. Statistically, they make all the difference, you know.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Vaccines, my dear chap, vaccines. Statistically, they make all the difference, you know.

So much that we are frantically boosting everyone, and as I predicted vaccinating children against the wishes of Britain’s greatest behavioural scientists, as fast as we can.

Estimates put the previous infection rate in Gauteng at rates as high as 80%. Are you finally renouncing “natural immunity” and the Great Barrington Declaration? Quite the significant, if unsurprising, climbdown if so.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

So much that we are frantically boosting everyone, and as I predicted vaccinating children against the wishes of Britain’s greatest behavioural scientists, as fast as we can.

Estimates put the previous infection rate in Gauteng at rates as high as 80%. Are you finally renouncing “natural immunity” and the Great Barrington Declaration? Quite the significant, if unsurprising, climbdown if so.

I really don’t know what you are basing your opinions on, jfman. You seem to read an awful,lot into my posts which is not there.

Of course we are boosting everyone, that’s how we reduce pressure on the NHS, although I must say I don’t agree with vaccinating children as there is no demonstrable benefit to them from doing so.

Once again, you are putting emphasis on infection rates rather than hospitalisations. The combination of vaccinations and infections will help us to get to the herd immunity that we have talked about so many times.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I really don’t know what you are basing your opinions on, jfman. You seem to read an awful,lot into my posts which is not there.

Of course we are boosting everyone, that’s how we reduce pressure on the NHS, although I must say I don’t agree with vaccinating children as there is no demonstrable benefit to them from doing so.

Once again, you are putting emphasis on infection rates rather than hospitalisations. The combination of vaccinations and infections will help us to get to the herd immunity that we have talked about so many times.

Bless, still stuck in mid-2020.

You’ll get there eventually. If Covid doesn’t get you first.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by jfman

Bless, still stuck in mid-2020.

You’ll get there eventually. If Covid doesn’t get you first.

Do you need a new knife?