rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,224
|
Post by rjdgull on Jan 13, 2021 7:48:54 GMT
link - I thought it was a case of the second jab been put back so that more vulnerable people can get the first job quicker which on its own gives a good degree of protection and mathematically would save more lives. 40 million Pfizer jabs ordered but more importantly 100 million for the Oxford Astra Zeneca which is much cheaper and easier to distribute from a logistical point of view. This is not about politics but I am actually very glad we are not part of the EU vaccination programme, slow to approve usage, late ordering and backing the wrong boats - link
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2021 8:49:07 GMT
It doesn’t instil a lot of confidence in these jabs does it?
First of all the government say a second jab in 3 weeks, then it’s a second jab in 3 months, then it’s.......I don’t think I’ll be having the first jab let alone a second...whenever that might be!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2021 10:36:57 GMT
Reg
Indeed Reg, and it's the fact that Government changed the rules of the game to impose 'second jab after 3 months', AFTER some had already had the first jab, that is at the heart of the 'ethical issues' that Rob brings to our attention. Patients agreeing to enter into a course of treatment with their Doctor, and giving their consent on the clear understanding from their GP that it involves and they will get a second jab in 3 weeks.
That politicians can step in part way through that process, and bin the understanding and agreement that Doctor and patient have entered into, does raise serious ethical questions both now and for the future. And that's before you take into account the other important point that Rob makes, that the Government imposed timescale between the jabs is contrary to what the drug manufacturer recommends (and surely recommended for good reason)
RJD reminds us of the reasons Government gave, and if it had mandated that any future treatments could only be entered into on the understanding that the jabs would be 3 months apart, I feel there would have been far less controversy. Politicians intervening part way through, to nullify existing Doctor/ Patient agreed and started courses of treatment, sits far less comfortably.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2021 14:46:39 GMT
The word ethics has been mentioned above, personally, I think the word should actually read ethnic...as in ethnic cleansing!
We all know the problem the government has had paying the poor old pensioners. Continually pushing up the retirement age, pensioners having to sell their houses to cover care home bills, and on and on it goes. This government and previous governments have just swept the problem under the carpet.
Along comes COVID and Wham...problem solved. 90% of the people dying are pensioners, what’s the daily average for deaths at the moment, 500-600-700. No wonder Rishi can splash the cash, let’s say the final death number is 100.000, which means 90.000 pensioners are no longer getting a pension, all the care homes are empty, the silly old buggers are no longer stealing our oxygen...a bit of Remoaner speech at the end there!
A pat on the back for the government, and all the bad bits just swept under that carpet again!
You tell me what’s wrong with this country.
|
|
|
Post by swatcat on Jan 14, 2021 9:25:40 GMT
The 'penny has dropped', just a little . . . "The UK is to introduce a travel ban on Brazil to prevent a new highly-infectious strain of Covid-19 being imported from the South American country. Government sources indicated on Wednesday night that immediate travel restrictions would be imposed similar to the pre-Christmas curbs placed on South Africa where another highly transmissible strain has emerged." . . . . about bloody time - the concept of border controls !! Up to 30 flights a day have been landing from the USA at LHR alone since the pandemic began, never mind Brazil, Mexico and all those other Nations with catastrophic levels of CV-19 infections. Is there a boarding requirement for PAX from all Nations to have a negative test now ? Will a negative test be replaced by a vax certificate as a boarding requirment in due course ? I hope so. Then, anti-vaxxers either get the jab or don't travel. Admittedly that impedes the freedoms of the anti-vax but more importantly, it restores freedoms from the risk of infection, to other citizens. uk.yahoo.com/news/uk-introduce-brazil-travel-ban-193739416.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2021 14:04:16 GMT
swatcat While those free from the risk of Covid infections, safe in the knowledge that their vaccine is protecting them, may wish to resume their lives with gay abandon, I hope they will do so while leaving those who have chosen not to be vaccinated to make their own decisions on how risk averse they want to be. They know at the moment that there are already estimated to be in excess of 3 million illegal immigrants in Britain, who obviously won’t be getting a letter from a GP inviting them along for a jab, and plenty more arriving by various means of transport, backs of lorries, boats etc, evading the Authorities on a daily basis. Those choosing not to get inoculated, will realise that in addition to that, the number of potentially asymptomatic spreaders could well be about to go through the roof, with everyone getting the vaccine possibly being added to that group. As swatcat points out, a negative test, assuring you that nobody boarding the plane has coronavirus, could be discontinued, and instead perhaps several hundred people who have had the vaccine all being allowed to fly …. each of them, as far as we know at the moment, not ruled out from being capable of asymptomatically passing on the virus, yet with the self assurance that their own safety is mostly ensured. Shouldn’t the unvaccinated be free to make their own risk assessment ? If it’s a case that the more that are vaccinated, the more potentially asymptomatic spreaders there are likely to be once we resume mingling ? ... then all the more reason for the unvaccinated to think even more carefully about whether they wish to join a plane load of passengers, particularly if those are mostly vaccinated, with no give away Covid symptoms to warn you. Government could of course restore their ‘freedom’ from the risk of infection, by compulsorily locking them up at home and preventing them from travelling. But a willingness to accept the risk would have been indicated by declining the vaccine already (not in the case of our many illegals of course) and neither would be being prevented from travelling feel much like ‘freedom’. If we are in the process of turning the majority of the country into potential asymptomatic spreaders of Covid, then yes, make that abundantly clear to all those considering opting against the vaccine, warn them of how much the risk to them would then be likely to increase, but don’t compulsorily ‘protect’ them against their wishes. But for the moment, it's one step at a time, and for the elderly, it's emerging fit and healthy from the vaccine procedure that they'll hope to achieve first link - Roll up ! , roll up !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2021 16:33:43 GMT
Rob 2. Let's hope some available resources for those NHS staff second jabs turn up eventually. Dr.Julia may have discovered why that may currently not be the case.
|
|
|
Post by swatcat on Jan 15, 2021 0:01:06 GMT
Alpine - regarding Dr Patterson's comments - to waste doses is bizarre of course, but a 3 week gap between 1st and 2nd injection is required, (as trialled) - the explanation may lie there. Yet as it happens, I know 2 front line NHS workers in Devon who have had both jabs already. It's a complex and intense scene atm.
|
|
|
Post by swatcat on Jan 15, 2021 1:27:25 GMT
Alpine - some thoughts on yours :- " While those free from the risk of Covid infections, safe in the knowledge that their vaccine is protecting them, may wish to resume their lives with gay abandon, I hope they will do so while leaving those who have chosen not to be vaccinated to make their own decisions on how risk averse they want to be." The point is that those who choose NOT to be vaccinated do not live in a vacuum - their decision takes away the right of others to be as free as possible of the risk of infection. Re. " 3 million illegal immigrants in Britain" - whether your figure is right or not is a moot point, but anyway, obviously illegal immigrants should be encouraged and organised to receive vaccination too - no questions asked. " . . . the number of potentially asymptomatic spreaders could well be about to go through the roof, with everyone getting the vaccine possibly being added to that group". That is an amazing assertion - i.e. that those vaccinated become asymptomatic spreaders. The vaccines work through moderating viral activity and whilst the effects on transmissibility are unclear as yet, it would be extremely surprising if lower viral loads do not reduce transmissibility. And " If we are in the process of turning the majority of the country into potential asymptomatic spreaders of Covid' - uuuummmm - no we're not in that process ! I'm certainly not saying that vaccination should be compulsory - you can choose. To help in your choice, if you refuse the vaccine and become infected, why not prepare to pay your own costs for NHS treatment for Covid19 ?
It is early days with these CV-19 vaccines but they have been tested as rigorously as possible and are the only hope we have at the moment to start to control this awful pandemic. Get a jab - if only for TUFC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2021 10:08:52 GMT
You’re heading back to City 17 again...people who actually use their brain and decide they don’t want to join a queue and be jabbed in the arm should be penalised...you’re going to fit in well on this site!
I think the figure of 3 million illegal immigrants was a figure from a few years back...they don’t update it for obvious reasons! And you’re under some delusion that even one of them is going to step forward to be jabbed...yep, you’re really gonna fit in! 🤘
|
|
|
Post by swatcat on Jan 15, 2021 14:38:36 GMT
Hi Reg - sorry don't know City 17 ? Please explain . . .
If people use their brains and refuse the vaccine yes, they have that right and I respect it. But if the reality is that their position of refusal puts other persons at risk, whilst they should not be penalised, neither should their inactions penalise those who they might infect with CV-19 because they have refused vaccination.
As for illegal Immigrants, if they are sure of 'no questions asked', some or many may take the Vax.
You can't blow away this pandemic with bluster or come to that, what's drawn from the internet - it needs a vaccine. As a TUFC supporter and you want to be watching live games, why not take the vaccine ?
I'm not trying to fit in or not fit in. ATB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2021 15:03:46 GMT
Mmmm...these posts of yours Swatty, they seem a bit too Squeaky Clean...almost bordering on propaganda!
You’re not related to the German head of propaganda from the last war are you, what was his name again, Gorbals or something...or was that the German chap who parachuted into Scotland?
You’re not sat in a dingy Whitehall office with Rob on one side of you and Miss Moneypenny on tother are you?
Mmmm...very suspicious!
City 17: Imagine being in China during the time of Mao, and you didn’t agree with what he said...something like that.
|
|
|
Post by swatcat on Jan 16, 2021 2:52:53 GMT
Reg - your use of 'humour' and 'scorn' is fine by me but do you have any actual points to make ? Moving on then - the latest news is that BJ has at last moved towards wide border controls i.e. requiring negative tests to board flights to the UK - it's a step in the right direction BUT adherence to other self-quarantine instructions has been measured as low as 11%. Border controls should have been introduced 8 months ago when the argument produced by the Scientists then was - no point in border restrictions, because the virus was already so prominently in circulation. IF THAT WAS RIGHT THEN, HOW IS IT DIFFERENT NOW ? UUuummm - I think the virus, is certainly as prominent or more prominently in circulation now ? Even though CV-19 is an unprecedented situation, this and many other serious mistakes have been made by the BJ Govt. Bringing it down to a personal level, if you want to control the virus, save lives and also save our TUFC for the future, having the fun of attending live matches again any time soon, then an anti-vax position makes little sense. ATB
|
|
|
Post by swatcat on Jan 16, 2021 9:18:07 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2021 9:42:14 GMT
No I don’t have any actual points to make...and neither do you! You turn up every day spouting the same old nonsense...no wonder you’re banned from all the other sites.
Have you not noticed that I’m the only one who now bothers to converse with you - if you want an actual point- more people are dying from boredom looking at your posts, than there are dying from Covid 19!
Still, it’s nice to have certainties in life, the sun will rise in the east tomorrow as always, the pensionable age will rise as always, and when we all rise tomorrow there will be yet another regurgitated load of nonsense from Swatcat...nice talking.
|
|