Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[Nearholmer]

7 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I'm just wondering who in society you are talking of?

If you read the reports I linked to, the best in basic information being the last, you will see.

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

These guys have some interesting things to say about it https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/covid19/2021/10/21/why-some-ethnic-groups-are-more-likely-to-refuse-the-covid-vaccine-and-what-we-could-do-about-it/

 

Similar thoughts about trust here https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n513

 

Very solid study  https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S0889159121001100?token=3A0966B9503DE9646157985BF6B0E1EBCC458862E2DDE7EA6A60DE5003E217B875C02B1607C934CC4C670B3EFD7AC6D4&originRegion=eu-west-1&originCreation=20211209085333

 

Eddie - I’m fully conscious that it’s a topic that’s difficult to discuss without sounding offensive, but when you take the various sources of information together, my crudely phrased observation is about right. And, I honestly table it as an observation, not a judgement.

 

I actually think the observation and, if they are understandable, the reasons behind the facts, are quite important, because the “popular image” of a voluntarily non-vaccinated person seems to be that of either a rabid anti-vaxxer who imbibes US-generated conspiracy theories at every turn, or a person who is simply cock-sure and selfish, but what emerges when you read these analyses is that the typical non-vaccinated person might be nothing like that, and is more likely to be marginalised, timid, and simply more afraid of vaccination than of Covid.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry but I don't buy a lot of this, as the vast majority in these groups are vaccinated !! I can accept that many people from all parts of society are at a larger risk of catching covid, whether it be from health, ethnicity, education, job or where they live. But as I said the vast majority of these groups do get vaccinated. Those that don't  seem to be either missed or led astray by one form of misguidance or another.

 

I have two acquaintances from a previous employment who are anti vaxers, two of what you would call normal people. Totally misguided in their beliefs. Both very nice people But !!

 

Would any normal person want to risk taking home a deadly disease to their loved ones, only the very selfish

 

My neighbours have a race car they take to track days and race. TIt has a roll bar, 4 point harness and upgraded brakes which are changed/worked on regularly, I assume they wear crash helmets. They are at greater danger when racing so take precautions.

 

I am in one of the higher risk groups because of my age and health history, so I try and take a bit of extra caution.

 

 

[Nearholmer]

7 minutes ago, hayfield said:

I don't buy a lot of this

But, how can you “not buy” a big, and well founded, academic research project that attempts to understand who tends not to seek vaccination, and what leads them to that position?

 

 

[Andy Hayter]

2 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

But, how can you “not buy” a big, and well founded, academic research project that attempts to understand who tends not to seek vaccination, and what leads them to that position?

 

 

 

Strange isn't it.  It is just like some people not accepting all of that academic information showing just how important vaccination is.

[Hobby]

3 minutes ago, hayfield said:

Sorry but I don't buy a lot of this, as the vast majority in these groups are vaccinated !! I can accept that many people from all parts of society are at a larger risk of catching covid, whether it be from health, ethnicity, education, job or where they live. But as I said the vast majority of these groups do get vaccinated. Those that don't  seem to be either missed or led astray by one form of misguidance or another.

 

I was going to reply to Nearholmer's reply to mine but John's done it better than I could have.

 

It surprises me that we live in a society which has consequences for people who do things to the detriment of Society, some of those consequences being loss of freedom for a long time and which we fully support. However we now have a scenario where people are deliberately taking actions which have and will in the future put many other, innocent, people in danger of death or a very shortened lifespan because of the actions of those few taking away the medical resources they need and yet some consider it acceptable "to protect their freedom".

 

I'd agree that more needs to be done to get the vaccination rates as high as possible, especially amongst certain groups, but for those who choose not to take up the offer there has to be consequences, we have consequences for people who steal, murder, etc., I'd rate those who refuse the vaccine for no medical reason in the same boat.

[PaulCheffus]

12 hours ago, Reorte said:

Just had a go at booking the booster, everywhere seems to give a choice of one date and time, when I'm at work. I'll try again tomorrow (and double check what the work policy is, bit tight if they expect people to take leave for this IMO).

Hi

 

My first two were local so just nipped out of work and had them done.

 

For the booster I had to travel 30 miles so chose to take the afternoon off and then do a bit of shopping.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[Nearholmer]

2 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I'd agree that more needs to be done to get the vaccination rates as high as possible, especially amongst certain groups, but for those who choose not to take up the offer there has to be consequences,

It’s about where you go first, though, I think.

 

The findings of that study, and others, suggest that the three things that might work best with those who are genuinely timid, and afraid more of the vaccination than the disease, might be:

 

- engagement, that is actually reaching-out to people;

 

- education; and,

 

- reassurance.

 

There is a lot of bridge-building to be done between the mainstream of society and some of the groups that seem least likely to accept vaccination.

[APOLLO]

14 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I'd agree that more needs to be done to get the vaccination rates as high as possible, especially amongst certain groups, but for those who choose not to take up the offer there has to be consequences, we have consequences for people who steal, murder, etc., I'd rate those who refuse the vaccine for no medical reason in the same boat.

 

I disagree (I'm triple jabbed).

 

Start of the slippery slope if we are not ULTRA CAREFULL. Yes more education and prompting IS needed, more walk in centres not needing appointments etc. I'm all for that BUT give the state (and big business etc) an inch and they will take a yard.

 

What next ? Personal embedded microchips, mandatory tracking of everyone 24/7, cashless society (where you can be monetarily turned off at a whim. The list goes on.

 

Be VERY CAREFULL what you wish for. Our freedoms have been hard fought for over many years, but can be lost at in an instant.

 

Brit15

[Reorte]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

Go easy on him - I read it to say he’d accepted vaccination, but had had qualms about doing so.

 

Not even qualms really. I had no issue personally with getting vaccinated as soon as I could.  My general opinion on any vaguely related matter is that I will default to not taking precautions without a convincing reason to do so, and I find approaching things from the other direction distasteful and obnoxious. In the case of Covid there is a pretty convincing reason.

 

But the post you replied to does show a common issue - people who don't see something saying exactly what they think, so they immediately assume the opposite extreme no matter what is actually being said. It suggests little willingness to try to see things from someone else's point of view. Even being able to empathise with someone whilst disagreeing with them gets you criticised.

 

I've read his withdrawal and accept it but I do find the jumping to conclusions rather depressing.

 

I also find the "selfish, think about others" line a matter of concern. Whilst of course it's a decent position to take in general it's a very easy one to mis-use; it's a loaded statement, "disagree with this and you're painting yourself as a nasty person" without even much consideration of the statement. It automatically makes anyone who argues against it look bad no matter how reasonable the original statement, and so whenever I see it I'm afraid I get a little suspicious of the person making it. My view is usually "How would I feel if I was in that other person's situation and condition?" And of course we're all "others" to everyone else anyway.

Edited December 9, 2021 by Reorte

[Reorte]

32 minutes ago, PaulCheffus said:

Hi

 

My first two were local so just nipped out of work and had them done.

 

For the booster I had to travel 30 miles so chose to take the afternoon off and then do a bit of shopping.

My first two were straightforward too. Got a call from the GP surgery, which is a fifteen minute walk away, and could easily fit me in after work both times. A bit early for my age group too (they seemed to get out of the blocks pretty fast there). I suppose I'm a bit surprised the booster isn't being just as easy, but on the other hand they seem to be trying to move much faster, which will put more pressure on.

[Dodger]

I have had all three of the jabs and must say on every occasion the process was carried out efficiently. However, I do think that the decision to have or have not is down to the individual. The amount of contradictory information about Covid 19 and it's variants along with the effects on age groups etc does not help the argument for vaccination at all. Perhaps if we were given the true facts then either side of the argument could argue their case in a more educated manner.

Stay safe

Dodger

Edited December 9, 2021 by Dodger
additional text

[Reorte]

1 minute ago, Dodger said:

I have had all three of the jabs and must say on every occasion the process was carried out efficiently. However, I do think that the decision to have or have not is down to the individual. The amount of contradictory information about Covid 19 and it's variants along with the effects on age groups etc does not help the argument for vaccination at all. Perhaps if we were given the true facts then either side of the argument could argue their case in a more educated manner.

 

People have been given the facts, but the world's full of people with agendas chucking in their view. There really isn't all that much contradictory information if you dig around and filter out the complete nonsense. There isn't complete certainty - there never is, about anything - and some people like to latch on to that and mis-use it, but the broad picture is fairly well spelled out.

 

There can be a bit more confusion about what the facts actually mean though, because a fact itself is merely that, a fact. Their value, relevance, and importance, that's where things get subjective without being nonsense, and where the more dangerous people with dodgy agendas can be more persuasive.

[Hobby]

49 minutes ago, Reorte said:

But the post you replied to does show a common issue - people who don't see something saying exactly what they think, so they immediately assume the opposite extreme no matter what is actually being said. 

 

I've read his withdrawal and accept it but I do find the jumping to conclusions rather depressing.

 

I read it several times before I replied and was not jumping to conclusions, sometimes the way we word posts can be read in different ways, and we just have to accept that and clarify/change the post, as I did but you choose not to. Such is life.

[Hobby]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

Start of the slippery slope if we are not ULTRA CAREFULL. Yes more education and prompting IS needed, more walk in centres not needing appointments etc. I'm all for that BUT give the state (and big business etc) an inch and they will take a yard.

 

What next ? Personal embedded microchips, mandatory tracking of everyone 24/7, cashless society (where you can be monetarily turned off at a whim. The list goes on.

 

Be VERY CAREFULL what you wish for. Our freedoms have been hard fought for over many years, but can be lost at in an instant.

 

I think you are taking it to extremes. We accept a great many curbs on our liberty for the greater good, I don't see this issue as any different to the multitude of others we already accept, and certainly not in the way you envisage things going if we did go down the line of mandatory vaccines (or a curb on treatment or some other restriction if they don't).

 

Education has to be the initial way forward, and for many (most?) of those who haven't had a jab that's still the best way, but for some it'll never work and so there has to be some other way of sorting it.

Edited December 9, 2021 by Hobby

[beast66606]

10 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

People have been given the facts, but the world's full of people with agendas chucking in their view. There really isn't all that much contradictory information if you dig around and filter out the complete nonsense. There isn't complete certainty - there never is, about anything - and some people like to latch on to that and mis-use it, but the broad picture is fairly well spelled out.

 

There can be a bit more confusion about what the facts actually mean though, because a fact itself is merely that, a fact. Their value, relevance, and importance, that's where things get subjective without being nonsense, and where the more dangerous people with dodgy agendas can be more persuasive.

 

I have given up posting facts* in this thread, and they are verifiable as I post links to them - yesterday people challenged them (not sure how you can challenge a published fact unless you have on the spot information) and yet people who admit they are basing their comments on not much more than opinions are not challenged.

I will read but I'm leaving the lunatics to comment on the asylum (mostly)

 

 

* facts as in they are (mainly) published by HMG, ONS or the NHS and are certainly not based on opinion.

[Reorte]

4 minutes ago, beast66606 said:

* facts as in they are (mainly) published by HMG, ONS or the NHS and are certainly not based on opinion.

 

Definitely. The Covid dashboard site has evolved in to a pretty good source of a lot of well-presented information.

[Torper]

22 minutes ago, Dodger said:

Perhaps if we were given the true facts then either side of the argument could argue their case in a more educated manner.

 

Facts have been given time and time again, but people who have a different agenda always seem to find some way of finding some fault or other with them.  One thing about which there is no doubt is that unvaccinated covid sufferers are taking up ICU and other hospital beds needed by people who have life threatening ilnnesses and who are likely to die if they don't get speedy treatment.  However, because some selfish individual has insisted on his so-called rights not to be vaccinated and as a result is now taking up an inordinate amount of time in an ICU, those people are being deprived of the treatment they need. 

 

I'm quite happy to agree that people should not be forced to be vaccinated.  But if they don't, then inevitably there must be consequences and I entirely agree with the measures being taken in Germany and Austria, and which will inevitable be followed by other European countries.

 

DT

[Hobby]

9 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

Definitely. The Covid dashboard site has evolved in to a pretty good source of a lot of well-presented information.

 

I agree. The problem is that we end up discussing things that are not covered by it (non-vax'd hospital admissions!). Maybe all the information is out there somewhere, I sometimes wish that it was and well all had access to it, but then we'd still end up with people interpreting it in different ways to suit their own agenda! No win situation?  

[Dodger]

Hi Reorte and others,

I do not agree with you regarding people having been given the facts but do agree with you regarding the different agendas and complete nonsense we are fed, and in my opinion this is where the problem regarding this pandemic lies.

For example If someone can tell me why the figures in respect of deaths relating to Covid 19/and or it variants include people who have been tested positive within the last 28 days before their demise. I cannot recall hearing an explanation for the reasoning behind this 28 day figure. I cannot think of any other reporting of deaths where the reason has been attributed to an event that took place 28 days before the death occured. Until I hear a sound argument for the methodology I see no reason for the figures to be calculated with this 28 day previous anomaly.

To make an informed decision regarding vaccination individuals need the facts not what might or might not occur but what has occurred because of Covid. 

The only certainty at the moment is the vulnerabiity of certain groups and of course these people would be the ones expected to have the vaccination along with anyone else who wished to be innoculated.

Stay safe          

Roger

Edited December 9, 2021 by Dodger
additional text

[Hobby]

A bit about here, but not sure it fully answers your question.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-uk-wide-methodology-agreed-to-record-covid-19-deaths

 

https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2020/08/12/behind-the-headlines-counting-covid-19-deaths/

[durham light infantry]

Some real information to absorb. Our local A & E on Monday had a 20 hour waiting time to assess and finally admit one of our residents. Down to staff shortages and not wanting to admit until all options were exhausted.

This impinged on our strained resources, with 4 members of staff being deployed at various times during that day to ensure that he was looked after.

[Dodger]

Hi Hobby,

Thanks for taking the time to post the links. I have read the contents of the documents, whilethey go someway to answering my question, and notwithstanding the agreement of the agencies concerned I am not convinced that this methodology is sound. It is my opinion that this way of calculating has been engineered for reasons other than to convey the true nature of the beast. I feel that the figure of deaths should be attributed to Covid 19 only and  not using the within 28 days anomaly. The calculation is too 'broad brush'. Someone dying of pneumonia is not included in the 'deaths on the road' figure because they used the public highway for some reason in the last 28 days, there is no reason why they should be and similarly the same with the Covid death figures.

 

 

I am going to leave it there on this emotive and devisive subject.

 

Stay safe

Roger

[boxbrownie]

Well one fact I can add is Mum’s ward at the hospital is now cleared of the Covid isolation, all’s well……as can be.

 

 

[rocor]

3 hours ago, PaulCheffus said:

Hi

 

My first two were local so just nipped out of work and had them done.

 

For the booster I had to travel 30 miles so chose to take the afternoon off and then do a bit of shopping.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

 

My first 2 jabs, required a rail trip with a need to change trains mid-journey. My booster booked for next Monday is a pharmacy that is less than half an hour's walk away.

 

I did consider booking to the same place as my first two inoculations on the basis of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

[Andy Hayter]

50 minutes ago, Dodger said:

Hi Hobby,

Thanks for taking the time to post the links. I have read the contents of the documents, whilethey go someway to answering my question, and notwithstanding the agreement of the agencies concerned I am not convinced that this methodology is sound. It is my opinion that this way of calculating has been engineered for reasons other than to convey the true nature of the beast. I feel that the figure of deaths should be attributed to Covid 19 only and  not using the within 28 days anomaly. The calculation is too 'broad brush'. Someone dying of pneumonia is not included in the 'deaths on the road' figure because they used the public highway for some reason in the last 28 days, there is no reason why they should be and similarly the same with the Covid death figures.

 

 

I am going to leave it there on this emotive and devisive subject.

 

Stay safe

Roger

 

We have been here before but with multiple pages over several threads I will repeat for your benefit.

 

People do not die from Covid.

They die because Covid causes various problems and these are what kills the victims - heart issues, kidney failure and mostly lung/pneumonia complications.  Saying whether Covid is the or even a cause is open to some interpretation.  To avoid the subjectivity the UK have decided  to standardise.  It is not perfect but under the conditions, no system is ever likely to be perfect.  It is however consistent.

Edited December 9, 2021 by Andy Hayter