Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2021 15:38:28 GMT 1
I don't know who you have in mind when you say 'so called experts', but the best case scenarios I was reading months ago were much better than the current numbers. If you're suggesting we're now doing better than the best case scenarios were modelling, I'll have a pint of that too, please. Your second paragraph contradicts itself. You say the Health Minister predicted three months ago that we'd be doing worse than we are, but then say the situation is in line with what the government expected - which is it? But the inescapable truth remains. The UK is doing much worse than the rest of Europe; we're behind on vaccinations, our death rate is much higher and our case numbers are much higher. Yet those better performing European countries are not in lockdown. So why don't we try to emulate them instead of wasting time saying this is better than 'so called experts' predicted and settling for something this bad? To answer your first point, a recent example is 4 different models from last month which outlined hospitalisations could reach beteen 2,000 & 7,000 a day this month unless measure were put in place, the latest 7 day average is under 800 a day On the second point, ok it was badly phrased but you knew what my point was. The gov't lifted restrictions, they said cases could reach 100k a day, we are currently getting half of that figure, therefore in the govt's eyes things are ok and why do they need to go to a plan B? They have clearly accepted that living with it means high cases and as long as the NHS is not overloaded then that is something they accept. I appreciate that some people are horrified by that, but I'd question what is an acceptable figure of cases/hospitalisations/deaths in peoples eyes? On the final point, no we aren't doing great at the moment but a bit of context. Our cases are high partially due to the simple fact we test so much, I'm not suggesting for one minute that it is all down to that and because we are open I expect we are one of the worst, however it would be interesting to see the figures if all countries were testing a similar numbers. But considering our case numbers are so high, there are others in Europe with larger numbers when it comes to hospitalisations & deaths (unless when we say Europe we mean Germany, Spain, France & Italy).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2021 15:43:12 GMT 1
They're harping on about a sharp rise in Ipswich, but the MP was on just now saying they're fine. There's lots of cases but minimal hospitalisations. 99% of people in Ipswich hospital are non or single vaccinated. Unless medically except I have absolutely zero sympathy; they're part of the problem! If you're double vaccinated you're contributing to the solution. Everyone with an ounce of common sense knows this. In planning services we always know that take up of any vaccine is never going to be 100%, and we still have to plan accordingly that some won't take up the vaccine and still need treating. With it looking likely that Covid is around for some time I expect allocating resources in hospitals to the issue will be required long term as well. Matt, you clearly are in the know compared to a lot of us on this board, can I ask a question. Every year we hear the NHS is going to struggle through the winter and this year we obviously knew it would be harder than ever. Have you seen any difference this year when it comes to planning, beds, staffing, PPE, etc? Or is it a case of making do with what you've got and somehow trying to keep everything from falling apart?
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Oct 21, 2021 16:32:57 GMT 1
In planning services we always know that take up of any vaccine is never going to be 100%, and we still have to plan accordingly that some won't take up the vaccine and still need treating. With it looking likely that Covid is around for some time I expect allocating resources in hospitals to the issue will be required long term as well. Matt, you clearly are in the know compared to a lot of us on this board, can I ask a question. Every year we hear the NHS is going to struggle through the winter and this year we obviously knew it would be harder than ever. Have you seen any difference this year when it comes to planning, beds, staffing, PPE, etc? Or is it a case of making do with what you've got and somehow trying to keep everything from falling apart? Very basically its the latter answer - making do and hoping everything works. The NHS is a very wide range of services, and so some services suffer pressures more than others, and you could argue for days what constitues a crisis. Also as its such a big organisation any interventions to make things better take time to work through the system so change is seen But generally the big issue is staffing. Both the cost of running services and delivering them effectively revolves around staffing levels and they are under great strain this year for a whole host of reasons, and that is on the back of having staff problems for a number of years. Staff can't be sourced quickly and cheaply so NHS trusts have to work with what they have and reallocate staff to the areas of most need. I don't have any involvement in staff issues so maybe other posters may be better placed to say whats changed this year, but my understanding is that more staff are pushed towards the areas that deal with serious cases, and so capacity in preventative and elective services is reduced. So probably the very front line critical care remains ok, but a big backlog starts to build up else where. There is very little wriggle room in staffing, and it only takes a small shift in staffing levels to really change the effectivness of services. Unlike other sectors its also difficult to recruit a dr, nurse, anthetist etc quickly if a gap in the work force emerges.
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 21, 2021 16:44:46 GMT 1
I don't know who you have in mind when you say 'so called experts', but the best case scenarios I was reading months ago were much better than the current numbers. If you're suggesting we're now doing better than the best case scenarios were modelling, I'll have a pint of that too, please. Your second paragraph contradicts itself. You say the Health Minister predicted three months ago that we'd be doing worse than we are, but then say the situation is in line with what the government expected - which is it? But the inescapable truth remains. The UK is doing much worse than the rest of Europe; we're behind on vaccinations, our death rate is much higher and our case numbers are much higher. Yet those better performing European countries are not in lockdown. So why don't we try to emulate them instead of wasting time saying this is better than 'so called experts' predicted and settling for something this bad? To answer your first point, a recent example is 4 different models from last month which outlined hospitalisations could reach beteen 2,000 & 7,000 a day this month unless measure were put in place, the latest 7 day average is under 800 a day On the second point, ok it was badly phrased but you knew what my point was. The gov't lifted restrictions, they said cases could reach 100k a day, we are currently getting half of that figure, therefore in the govt's eyes things are ok and why do they need to go to a plan B? They have clearly accepted that living with it means high cases and as long as the NHS is not overloaded then that is something they accept. I appreciate that some people are horrified by that, but I'd question what is an acceptable figure of cases/hospitalisations/deaths in peoples eyes? On the final point, no we aren't doing great at the moment but a bit of context. Our cases are high partially due to the simple fact we test so much, I'm not suggesting for one minute that it is all down to that and because we are open I expect we are one of the worst, however it would be interesting to see the figures if all countries were testing a similar numbers. But considering our case numbers are so high, there are others in Europe with larger numbers when it comes to hospitalisations & deaths (unless when we say Europe we mean Germany, Spain, France & Italy). Good post.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Oct 21, 2021 18:38:30 GMT 1
Deaths in England and Wales peaked on the 8th April 2020, which (given the lag between infection and death), implies that infections peaked and started to decrease before the lockdown on the 23rd March 2020. This has been acknowledged by Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty, who said that the R-number was decreasing before the national lockdown.
Professor Simon Wood, Chair of Computational Studies at the School of Mathematics at the University of Edinburgh, authored a peer-reviewed paper published in Biometrics, which found that Covid-19 levels were probably falling before each of the UK’s three lockdowns.
Lockdowns also cause great harms. Perhaps this is why a quantifiable cost benefit analysis of lockdown has yet to materialise. As one government advisor told me last year, the government “will fight like weasels in a bag” to avoid admitting lockdown was a mistake.
In the vacuum left by government, Civitas attempted to quantify some of the known costs in a working paper, What price lockdown? in December 2020. Day by day, the news rings with frightening stories of NHS waiting lists, mental health problems in children, late diagnosed and untreated cancer, 70,000 non-Covid excess deaths in the home, educational disruption, business closures, national debt, broken tax pledges, the list goes on.
This was foreseen. Veteran disaster planner Professor Lucy Easthope is involved in planning for excess death and she told me,
“For every Covid death we would estimate another four deaths over two to five years, and that is how we plan body storage. You see extra deaths for domestic violence and obstetrics, delayed or missed oncology diagnosis, no admission to A&E, sepsis and suicide.”
On the 22nd March 2021, just one day before the anniversary of lockdown, Chris Whitty acknowledged in a press briefing that the government had known “right from the beginning the lockdown was going to have really severe effects on many people’s health” and that “for many people, physical or mental wellbeing have been very badly affected by this. Ranging from increased levels of domestic abuse, loneliness – particularly in older people who felt very much isolated in their areas – physical health, people maybe exercising less, greater amounts of alcohol consumption.” He also said that coronavirus restrictions would affect livelihoods for years, with government able only to “reduce and not eliminate” those effects.
Laura Dodsworth.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Oct 21, 2021 19:08:04 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Oct 21, 2021 20:38:54 GMT 1
Matt, you clearly are in the know compared to a lot of us on this board, can I ask a question. Every year we hear the NHS is going to struggle through the winter and this year we obviously knew it would be harder than ever. Have you seen any difference this year when it comes to planning, beds, staffing, PPE, etc? Or is it a case of making do with what you've got and somehow trying to keep everything from falling apart? Very basically its the latter answer - making do and hoping everything works. The NHS is a very wide range of services, and so some services suffer pressures more than others, and you could argue for days what constitues a crisis. Also as its such a big organisation any interventions to make things better take time to work through the system so change is seen But generally the big issue is staffing. Both the cost of running services and delivering them effectively revolves around staffing levels and they are under great strain this year for a whole host of reasons, and that is on the back of having staff problems for a number of years. Staff can't be sourced quickly and cheaply so NHS trusts have to work with what they have and reallocate staff to the areas of most need. I don't have any involvement in staff issues so maybe other posters may be better placed to say whats changed this year, but my understanding is that more staff are pushed towards the areas that deal with serious cases, and so capacity in preventative and elective services is reduced. So probably the very front line critical care remains ok, but a big backlog starts to build up else where. There is very little wriggle room in staffing, and it only takes a small shift in staffing levels to really change the effectivness of services. Unlike other sectors its also difficult to recruit a dr, nurse, anthetist etc quickly if a gap in the work force emerges. You have also got a lot of NHS staff that are physically and mentally exhausted from dealing with this for the last 18 months plus, who have had a lack of breaks, and arent hearing their concerns listened to by the government and then some anti vax idiots threaten them in person and online, yet there dont seem to be consequences for them. There were quite a lot of retired people who came out to help short term too, who aren't again, plus the decreased numbers of european workers
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2021 21:17:54 GMT 1
Very basically its the latter answer - making do and hoping everything works. The NHS is a very wide range of services, and so some services suffer pressures more than others, and you could argue for days what constitues a crisis. Also as its such a big organisation any interventions to make things better take time to work through the system so change is seen But generally the big issue is staffing. Both the cost of running services and delivering them effectively revolves around staffing levels and they are under great strain this year for a whole host of reasons, and that is on the back of having staff problems for a number of years. Staff can't be sourced quickly and cheaply so NHS trusts have to work with what they have and reallocate staff to the areas of most need. I don't have any involvement in staff issues so maybe other posters may be better placed to say whats changed this year, but my understanding is that more staff are pushed towards the areas that deal with serious cases, and so capacity in preventative and elective services is reduced. So probably the very front line critical care remains ok, but a big backlog starts to build up else where. There is very little wriggle room in staffing, and it only takes a small shift in staffing levels to really change the effectivness of services. Unlike other sectors its also difficult to recruit a dr, nurse, anthetist etc quickly if a gap in the work force emerges. Thank you for the response and to be honest its what I suspected (feared). There are obviously different opinions on how this pandemic should be handled but I would imagine most people would want the gov't to pull out all the stops to prepare the NHS for the winter, rather than just do what they do every year. I know that staffing isn't an easy task but I still think that there are ways of delivering that if there is enough will & innovation. But that has got to come from the people at the very top
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Oct 22, 2021 8:18:56 GMT 1
Very basically its the latter answer - making do and hoping everything works. The NHS is a very wide range of services, and so some services suffer pressures more than others, and you could argue for days what constitues a crisis. Also as its such a big organisation any interventions to make things better take time to work through the system so change is seen But generally the big issue is staffing. Both the cost of running services and delivering them effectively revolves around staffing levels and they are under great strain this year for a whole host of reasons, and that is on the back of having staff problems for a number of years. Staff can't be sourced quickly and cheaply so NHS trusts have to work with what they have and reallocate staff to the areas of most need. I don't have any involvement in staff issues so maybe other posters may be better placed to say whats changed this year, but my understanding is that more staff are pushed towards the areas that deal with serious cases, and so capacity in preventative and elective services is reduced. So probably the very front line critical care remains ok, but a big backlog starts to build up else where. There is very little wriggle room in staffing, and it only takes a small shift in staffing levels to really change the effectivness of services. Unlike other sectors its also difficult to recruit a dr, nurse, anthetist etc quickly if a gap in the work force emerges. Thank you for the response and to be honest its what I suspected (feared). There are obviously different opinions on how this pandemic should be handled but I would imagine most people would want the gov't to pull out all the stops to prepare the NHS for the winter, rather than just do what they do every year. I know that staffing isn't an easy task but I still think that there are ways of delivering that if there is enough will & innovation. But that has got to come from the people at the very top If a lot of prevention work is done early I guess it be in a better position, unfortunately that's not really possible in the middle of a crisis which requires as many hands on deck
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Oct 22, 2021 9:25:21 GMT 1
They're really hiding behind Covid-19 now, it's getting ridiculous. A few members of the ambulance service told me they're attending what should be doctors appointments by 999 every night. People are getting frustrated not being able to see a doctor or it being a long wait, getting twitchy and dialling out ambulances. What are the doctors so scared of? Nearly every other job is performance measured, why shouldn't we have access to data around appointments?
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 22, 2021 10:19:30 GMT 1
I've had more doctors appointments in the last 12/18 months that ever before and due to circumstances most of them have been telephone ones (but a few where I've been called in for face to face, some later on the same day).
I do actually see merits in phone appointments in a lot of cases, but not all. It saves time and many things can be sorted just with a chat, not everyone has anything that can actually be seen so basically a face to face is nothing more than a chat anyway.
However they now need to expand that so those who DO actually need to see a doc can get a follow up appointment very quickly afterwards (say within 24 hours).
I can see both sides of this arguement tbh.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 22, 2021 11:52:51 GMT 1
Do you think your switching channels means those discussions aren't happening any more? Rather patronising... Not wanting to listen to that b******s, and not thinking it's happening, are two very different things, but i expect you knew i'd know that already By all means avoid the news. I do that often and feel better for it. But the last thing I'd do is turn to talk radio, not so much a bastion of common sense as a honey pot for loud mouthed ignorance and prejudice. If I listened to that I'd want to emigrate tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 22, 2021 16:40:21 GMT 1
Rather patronising... Not wanting to listen to that b******s, and not thinking it's happening, are two very different things, but i expect you knew i'd know that already By all means avoid the news. I do that often and feel better for it. But the last thing I'd do is turn to talk radio, not so much a bastion of common sense as a honey pot for loud mouthed ignorance and prejudice. If I listened to that I'd want to emigrate tomorrow. No slight on you, but the people who listen to Talk Radio would probably help you pack.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Oct 22, 2021 17:15:39 GMT 1
By all means avoid the news. I do that often and feel better for it. But the last thing I'd do is turn to talk radio, not so much a bastion of common sense as a honey pot for loud mouthed ignorance and prejudice. If I listened to that I'd want to emigrate tomorrow. No slight on you, but the people who listen to Talk Radio would probably help you pack. I wouldn't let them anywhere near!
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Oct 22, 2021 18:03:49 GMT 1
I know the link you posted is from the Guardian, but the biggest drivers of the anti-GP sentiment over the last few months has been the right wing press. This has led to even more people making demands of their GPs and is leading to many GPs either bringing their retirement forward or to the younger ones just jacking it in. Saw this post on my FB feed from a very angry GP the other day and it shows good reason why they are even considering industrial action.
Dear Readers. To add clarity to my last post. It would seem that various right-wing newspapers are running campaigns insisting that GPs start seeing people face to face'. May I point out a few facts.
-Firstly, of the one million primary care consults per day in England over the last few months, NHSE figures show HALF have been face to face. The overall demand has gone up by over 20% compared to pre-pandemic times. WE ARE SEEING PATIENTS FACE TO FACE.
-You may recall an adulterous little nematode called Matt Hancock. He used to be health secretary. Last year, he asked for half of all consultants to be managed remotely in the long run. Which, from the figures above, it would seem that Primary Care has been managing to do.
-There is still a Covid-19 pandemic going on. 139,000 Brits have died from this illness. 49,000 new cases were reported yesterday. Vaccines are helping, but this condition is still serious.
-Primary Care has been underfunded for many successive governments. A bit like the rest of the NHS, really.
-This means that there hasn't been as much investment in GP Surgeries as there should have been. Most GP surgeries do NOT have waiting rooms sufficient for the middle of a pandemic. Social distancing is difficult in small waiting rooms.
-If, as these campaigns demanded, we saw everyone face-to-face, we would rapidly end up with full waiting rooms, with no social distancing, and potential cases of Covid in the room next to other patients. Think back to the average GP waiting room in 2019 - standing room only, and several kids and adults sneezing and coughing everywhere.
-No one wants to become a GP anymore. The number of full-time-equivalent GPs is going DOWN as the population goes up. There are many reasons for this; underfunding Primary Care is one of them.
-So, you have a situation where demand is going up, the number of GPs is going down, there is nowhere to safely seat the patients, and the pandemic rages on.
-The choice for GPs is difficult. Most of us are using triage techniques, and deciding which cases to see face to face, and which cases can be seen remotely. It isn't perfect. We know that remote consults can sometimes miss serious illness. But we also know that a case of Covid in a full waiting room will result in potentially everyone catching the illness.
-The only other safe way of avoiding local Covid outbreaks would be to spend much more time between cases, i.e., build up a waiting list. This is already happening for many surgeries, partly due to the surge in demand. Waiting several weeks to see a doctor isn't great for missing serious illness, either.
-GPs have been busy doing other stuff too. 75% of the vaccines in the UK have been set up and organised by Primary Care. -Morale is worse in Primary Care than I have ever seen it. Every day, someone on mainstream media or SoMe is having a tantrum saying that they can go to Tesco or to the football, so why can't they see their GP at the drop of a pin, or why don't GPs have their paid docked 90% because they aren't doing any work? I don't recall working this hard since my house officer days doing 100 hour weeks in the 90s.
-Add to all this the usual bulls*** from anti-vaxxers, Covid-denialists, adult toddlers demanding everything under the sun, and so on
-And lastly, I am reminded of my earlier days at medical school, where I was taught that 90% of the time, a good clinical history alone is sufficient to reach a diagnosis; examination isn't always needed.
Some time when the pandemic is over, we will return to the halcyon days of packed waiting rooms full of screaming snotty kids, drunks, shouty louts, and GPs running an hour late. But for now, there is simply no way that we can accede to the demands of hysterical Daily Fail readers and populist buffoon politicians. Not without people coming to even more harm than with the current situation.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Oct 22, 2021 19:53:38 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Oct 23, 2021 13:03:04 GMT 1
I know the link you posted is from the Guardian, but the biggest drivers of the anti-GP sentiment over the last few months has been the right wing press. This has led to even more people making demands of their GPs and is leading to many GPs either bringing their retirement forward or to the younger ones just jacking it in. Saw this post on my FB feed from a very angry GP the other day and it shows good reason why they are even considering industrial action.
Dear Readers. To add clarity to my last post. It would seem that various right-wing newspapers are running campaigns insisting that GPs start seeing people face to face'. May I point out a few facts.
-Firstly, of the one million primary care consults per day in England over the last few months, NHSE figures show HALF have been face to face. The overall demand has gone up by over 20% compared to pre-pandemic times. WE ARE SEEING PATIENTS FACE TO FACE.
-You may recall an adulterous little nematode called Matt Hancock. He used to be health secretary. Last year, he asked for half of all consultants to be managed remotely in the long run. Which, from the figures above, it would seem that Primary Care has been managing to do.
-There is still a Covid-19 pandemic going on. 139,000 Brits have died from this illness. 49,000 new cases were reported yesterday. Vaccines are helping, but this condition is still serious.
-Primary Care has been underfunded for many successive governments. A bit like the rest of the NHS, really.
-This means that there hasn't been as much investment in GP Surgeries as there should have been. Most GP surgeries do NOT have waiting rooms sufficient for the middle of a pandemic. Social distancing is difficult in small waiting rooms.
-If, as these campaigns demanded, we saw everyone face-to-face, we would rapidly end up with full waiting rooms, with no social distancing, and potential cases of Covid in the room next to other patients. Think back to the average GP waiting room in 2019 - standing room only, and several kids and adults sneezing and coughing everywhere.
-No one wants to become a GP anymore. The number of full-time-equivalent GPs is going DOWN as the population goes up. There are many reasons for this; underfunding Primary Care is one of them.
-So, you have a situation where demand is going up, the number of GPs is going down, there is nowhere to safely seat the patients, and the pandemic rages on.
-The choice for GPs is difficult. Most of us are using triage techniques, and deciding which cases to see face to face, and which cases can be seen remotely. It isn't perfect. We know that remote consults can sometimes miss serious illness. But we also know that a case of Covid in a full waiting room will result in potentially everyone catching the illness.
-The only other safe way of avoiding local Covid outbreaks would be to spend much more time between cases, i.e., build up a waiting list. This is already happening for many surgeries, partly due to the surge in demand. Waiting several weeks to see a doctor isn't great for missing serious illness, either.
-GPs have been busy doing other stuff too. 75% of the vaccines in the UK have been set up and organised by Primary Care. -Morale is worse in Primary Care than I have ever seen it. Every day, someone on mainstream media or SoMe is having a tantrum saying that they can go to Tesco or to the football, so why can't they see their GP at the drop of a pin, or why don't GPs have their paid docked 90% because they aren't doing any work? I don't recall working this hard since my house officer days doing 100 hour weeks in the 90s.
-Add to all this the usual bulls*** from anti-vaxxers, Covid-denialists, adult toddlers demanding everything under the sun, and so on
-And lastly, I am reminded of my earlier days at medical school, where I was taught that 90% of the time, a good clinical history alone is sufficient to reach a diagnosis; examination isn't always needed.
Some time when the pandemic is over, we will return to the halcyon days of packed waiting rooms full of screaming snotty kids, drunks, shouty louts, and GPs running an hour late. But for now, there is simply no way that we can accede to the demands of hysterical Daily Fail readers and populist buffoon politicians. Not without people coming to even more harm than with the current situation. Yep spot on
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Oct 23, 2021 17:25:08 GMT 1
im stagerred they are even comnsidering this the mail Austria is considering a Covid-19 lockdown that would only restrict unvaccinated people as virus cases continue to rise.
Chancellor Alexander Schallenberg announced the news late on Friday during a meeting with state-level leaders to discuss a national response to increasing infection numbers.
'The pandemic is not yet in the rearview mirror,' Schallenberg said. 'We are about to stumble into a pandemic of the unvaccinated.'
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 23, 2021 17:44:09 GMT 1
im stagerred they are even comnsidering this the mail Austria is considering a Covid-19 lockdown that would only restrict unvaccinated people as virus cases continue to rise. Chancellor Alexander Schallenberg announced the news late on Friday during a meeting with state-level leaders to discuss a national response to increasing infection numbers. 'The pandemic is not yet in the rearview mirror,' Schallenberg said. 'We are about to stumble into a pandemic of the unvaccinated.' Sounds just like what is needed, stop those who chose to take the pee having the same privelidges as those who take Covid seriously. Best of luck trying to implement and police it though.
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Oct 25, 2021 19:15:04 GMT 1
Cases down 12,000 on last Monday, 25%, deaths also down 20% on last Monday
Almost as if the virus will do what it wants regardless of Plan B, C or Z or any other life destroying restrictions imposed
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 25, 2021 19:23:54 GMT 1
Cases down 12,000 on last Monday, 25%, deaths also down 20% on last Monday Almost as if the virus will do what it wants regardless of Plan B, C or Z or any other life destroying restrictions imposed Great news, here is some more though even the huge optimist in me would be a little cautious about this prediction. But maybe they know a bit more than we think. I agree about the virus doing whatever it likes regardless of plan B (or any other plan, it has it's own very random one). news.sky.com/story/covid-19-cases-could-fall-significantly-in-november-even-without-plan-b-modelling-suggests-12444117
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 25, 2021 19:41:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 25, 2021 19:44:35 GMT 1
Double vaccinated, tick, of course, why would I not be? Pfizer, tick. Not yet six months though, can someone convince me why I should take up the booster offer when it comes up?
I would have preffered to get a larger proportion of the world done, rather than topping up the already vaccinated.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Oct 25, 2021 19:53:34 GMT 1
Double vaccinated, tick, of course, why would I not be? Pfizer, tick. Not yet six months though, can someone convince me why I should take up the booster offer when it comes up? I would have preffered to get a larger proportion of the world done, rather than topping up the already vaccinated. its called staying ahead of the virus did you have the same worry when taking up your second jab ?
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 25, 2021 20:06:19 GMT 1
Double vaccinated, tick, of course, why would I not be? Pfizer, tick. Not yet six months though, can someone convince me why I should take up the booster offer when it comes up? I would have preffered to get a larger proportion of the world done, rather than topping up the already vaccinated. its called staying ahead of the virus did you have the same worry when taking up your second jab ? Not at all, it was adverised early on as a 2 stage jab. But now, I will be having my immunity topped up from ptetty good to very good while in some parts of the world even health professionals haven't all had the first jab. That is not staying ahead of the virus.
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Oct 25, 2021 20:25:03 GMT 1
Double vaccinated, tick, of course, why would I not be? Pfizer, tick. Not yet six months though, can someone convince me why I should take up the booster offer when it comes up? I would have preffered to get a larger proportion of the world done, rather than topping up the already vaccinated. Simply put, because if you and all others in your bracket have the same very ethical and reasonable thoughts, the government will lock us back in our houses. Javid said as much last week.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 25, 2021 20:39:43 GMT 1
Double vaccinated, tick, of course, why would I not be? Pfizer, tick. Not yet six months though, can someone convince me why I should take up the booster offer when it comes up? I would have preffered to get a larger proportion of the world done, rather than topping up the already vaccinated. Simply put, because if you and all others in your bracket have the same very ethical and reasonable thoughts, the government will lock us back in our houses. Javid said as much last week. Another lock down is a political non-starter after "freedom day". Many have said as much on here.
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 25, 2021 20:46:45 GMT 1
Simply put, because if you and all others in your bracket have the same very ethical and reasonable thoughts, the government will lock us back in our houses. Javid said as much last week. Another lock down is a political non-starter after "freedom day". Many have said as much on here. For sure. But boy does it give the media men a load more miles to pedal their now very boring tripe 😏
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 25, 2021 20:49:40 GMT 1
Another lock down is a political non-starter after "freedom day". Many have said as much on here. For sure. But boy does it give the media men a load more miles to pedal their now very boring tripe 😏 So what if I/we refuse the booster: What's the pay back, nothing?
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on Oct 25, 2021 20:53:20 GMT 1
For sure. But boy does it give the media men a load more miles to pedal their now very boring tripe 😏 So what if I/we refuse the booster: What's the pay back, nothing? I'm not in any rush right now to get the booster, though I will get round to it sometime. The big problem holding us back in this country right now is those refusing to have the first 2 jabs.
|
|