- This topic has 63 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 3 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
“Exclusive: Care home staff to face compulsory Covid vaccination“.
This is from the same government that murdered thousands in care homes last year by having ambulance workers ignore calls about elderly residents suffering from respiratory problems, and which when it did deign to treat some of them on its holy “NHS” sent many back to the same care homes in an infected state, thereby finishing off many other residents. It was a kind of “Let’s get R as high as possible among those oxygen-sucking, bed-blocking coffin-dodgers” Tory death-dance, with minor supporting parts played by the Labour, Liberal Democrat, Green, Scottish National, and Plaid Cymru parties.
Note that the eckshpurts aren’t even claiming that a SARS-CoV2 vaccine stops a person from being infectious.
Soon there are going to have to be strikes on top of the rioting that has already started, not because the union leaders give a toss but because what else can a person do if they are told “You’re not coming to work unless you’re vaccinated”? I wrote “strikes”, but “lockouts” would be closer to the mark. Not every person in Britain is a white-skinned Daily Mail reader who wears Union Jack underpants, is obsessed with house prices and ISAs, and believes disease is rife on the continent because the governments there eat too much olive oil and couldn’t organise a p*ss-up in a brewery because they’re too busy lazing about, ceasing only occasionally to march up and down in funny uniforms. There will be some resistance to this, whether it’s reported or not. I meet many people including many young people who currently take the same attitude that I do, namely “if the b*stards want to vaccinate me against my will, they’ll have to send some damned strong policemen.” There should be food collections to support those who are sacked for refusing compulsory vaccination, because they won’t be receiving welfare payments and I imagine the cops and local councils will look the other way if they say their landlords are trying to evict them in breach of the legislation that supposedly gives more protection to tenants during the pandemic.
My radio gets the news too. And I can do wild speculation if I fancied.
You’ve become tedious, Mystic N_eg.
On January 18, 2021 at 12:17 (#65364), ET replied:
I don’t necessarily agree with all of what N_ says in his post but some of it isn’t far from the truth. [ … ]
It was always going to happen in my view and the relevant professional bodies will wade in soon enough. Any “leaked” reference now is testing the waters of reaction. If it is legislated so then a rubicon has been crossed, the banks of which have been camped by the wating forces of mandatory vaccination (for health care workers) for some time. If such legislation becomes enacted for care home workers it will establish a precedent that will roll out to other vaccines and schools. From the telegraph link:
“Care home workers will be required by law to have a Covid-19 jab under a historic legal change agreed by Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock, The Telegraph can reveal.”
Personally, I support covid vaccinations and other vaccination programmes but making it mandatory is a big step with which I would not be too comfortable.
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by
Link was mean to be to my post 65364 in that thread here.
—
[ Mod: Duly amended. ]ET
“Personally, I support covid vaccinations and other vaccination programmes but making it mandatory is a big step with which I would not be too comfortable.”
Mandatory is not the same as a condition of employment. Nobody is forcing someone to be a frontline healthcare worker but you would need some conditions to do the job. If you are unwilling to accept the concept that vaccination is very important in interrupting a cycle of transmission from the outside world to vulnerable care home residents, then maybe you are not suited to do the job. The big practical problem however will be that carers may vote with their feet and shortages of staff may become even more severe if this is not handled with understanding.
SA: You make the point I was about to. Nobody is forcing people to wear a motorcycle helmet, but it’s compulsory if you want to ride a motorbike on public roads. I imagine certain hygiene precautions are required for surgeons, including masks, and so forth.
There are people who claim it’s against their religious beliefs to hand over the morning-after pill, or even contraception. Fine, they don’t have to. But a job in a pharmacy is probably not suitable for them.
Not really sure why Mystic N_eg is raving that “if the b*stards want to vaccinate me against my will, they’ll have to send some damned strong policemen.” – nobody is suggesting everyone faces a compulsory vaccination. That is a hysterical straw man.
This is what Mystic N_eg wants, though – to be a vaccine martyr. Ah well, if it makes his life meaningful, good for him. I trust that he has signed a waver, so the NHS will not have to treat his illness should he contract Covid-19.
Glenn-UK
At least N_, unlike some of the others we had here acknowledges that many people have died of covid 19:“This is from the same government that murdered thousands in care homes last year by having ambulance workers ignore calls about elderly residents suffering from respiratory problems,”
SA
“Mandatory is not the same as a condition of employment”
No it’s not the same, but it’s not very different either.
Having an income & the means to support yourself is pretty “mandatory” in the real world, outside of semantic hair splitting. And, as I understand it, having any kind of job at the moment is a pretty fortunate situation to be in.
So whilst not mandatory in the strictest sense of the word, it is punitively coercive and I don’t see much of a practical distinction between the two.
Furthermore, we’d be fools to imagine that this doesn’t also lower the bar & “set the stage” for all the subsequent measures that will invariably follow, the ‘condition’ attached to going into a shop, a sporting event, a bus or train, getting an education, accessing hospital treatment – basically being allowed to partake in “Life”.“Nobody is forcing someone to be a frontline healthcare worker….If you are unwilling to accept the concept…..then maybe you are not suited to do the job.”
No, nobody forced them to care for the elderly & infirm during what was presented as an unprecedented global health catastrophe, when they were having supposedly dangerously contagious folk dumped on them by a minority clique of politicians & institutional careerists of dubious qualifications.
But they did it, under torrid conditions and accepting the huge risks it apparently posed to them & their families.
But now, if they don’t “toe the line” and kowtow to the dictates of some horrendously discredited individuals & their flag waving cohorts, then “fk ’em!”Do we clap and pat them on the back as they shuffle off to the dole queue? or simply spit in their eye and call them biological terrorists from the cosseted comfort of our disingenuous & barely informed concern for the community’s health & well being?
glenn_uk
“Nobody is forcing people to wear a motorcycle helmet, but it’s compulsory if you want to ride a motorbike on public roads.”
What a load of tosh!
Wearing a motorcycle helmet is not at all equivalent to having a ‘permitted for emergency use’ but not ‘approved’ in the usual sense of the word, experimental gene therapy injected into your body.
Neither is being able to have a job &, ultimately, the ability to engage freely in all aspects of society equivalent to riding a motorbike on public roads.hmmmmmm, how could your point perhaps be even mildly equivalent?
Perhaps if you had to agree to have a motorcycle helmet glued to your head for all time; using an adhesive that many industry insiders and eminently qualified professionals are concerned might be horribly toxic to many & not even do the job it claims to; produced & rushed to market by companies with no liability & a shocking history of criminal fraud, on the promise of riches beyond any dream of avarice; under the coercion of a political class you wouldn’t trust to feed your dog or change your baby’s nappy; when those expressing dissenting opinions are suspiciously & conveniently deplatformed, criminalised, lampooned or outright smeared & raided by state enforcers under spurious emergency regulations; where the mainstream narrative is swamped with vested interests with a track record of simply ‘echoing’ our master’s voice; with establishment & military “influencer” organisations enthusiastically engaged in “managing the narrative”…….
…..well, I guess you’d have to be a tin foil hat wearing, conspiracy theorist, domestic extremist, biological terrorist, anti-helmet’er lunatic not to ride your motorcycle on the public roads under those conditions?“I trust that he has signed a waver, so the NHS will not have to treat his illness should he contract Covid-19”
Yuck!
And your last resort is to gleefully wish death on your self appointed “other”, fkn diabolical.
I suppose that person who drove home drunk and caused a car accident should just be left by the side of the road to die of their injuries? that smoker with lung cancer should be refused treatment and left to wither away as cancer eats through their flesh? regardless of who they are, what they’ve contributed to society or the fact that they are also a human being?If you’re so convinced by the jab, good luck to you. If you think it protects you & your loved ones, I hope it does. But once your mind is at rest and you relax in the knowledge that you are safe from symptoms (irrespective of whether you’re actually still contracting and transmitting infections whilst flaunting your vaccine passport), give it a rest with the vitriolic hatred & name calling of those who might, quite legitimately, make a different decision to you.
for fks sake, it’s folk like you who’d have people wearing colourful patches on their shirts to denote their ‘admissibility’ in society…… or maybe you’re just spinning a line for a few shillings?
Josh R
Your post contains a glaring contradiction. First you bemoan the fact that they were exposed to danger and then that they are being offered appropriate protection to do hazardous work:“No, nobody forced them to care for the elderly & infirm during what was presented as an unprecedented global health catastrophe, when they were having supposedly dangerously contagious folk dumped on them by a minority clique of politicians & institutional careerists of dubious qualifications.
But they did it, under torrid conditions and accepting the huge risks it apparently posed to them & their families. But now, if they don’t “toe the line” and kowtow to the dictates of some horrendously discredited individuals & their flag waving cohorts, then “fk ’em!””Yes indeed they were thrown into the coalface with no protective gear and at a time when little was known of the virus and there was no effective vaccine. But now we know more, we also think that to be offered the safe vaccine would protect the workers as well as the care home residents. It is sometimes a mandatory part of the job to observe safety rules with regards to doing a hazardous job and in this case the hazard applies to both carer and those cared for.
Your main objection which you then go on to write to Glenn about is about questioning the vaccine itself. One hopes that those indulging in healthcare are able to differentiate between data about vaccine safety and efficacy and propaganda broadcasted by antivaxxers.
And Josh R
“for fks sake, it’s folk like you who’d have people wearing colourful patches on their shirts to denote their ‘admissibility’ in society…… or maybe you’re just spinning a line for a few shillings?”
If you wish to survive in this blog, you need to be familiar with the rules. One of these requires you not to impugn other people’s motives. You are implying that Glenn is being paid to write this and I am afraid that is against the rules. The mods may have something to say.
‘josh R’, kindly respect the conventions of reasonable discourse. From the moderation rules for commenters:
Fair Play
Play the ball, not the man. Address arguments, not people. Do not impugn the motives of others, including me. No taunting.In particular, unfounded allegations that an opponent is serving as a paid shill are not welcome here. As CM elaborated during a heated debate:
Will EVERYBODY please tackle the arguments commenters make, and not refer to their motives for making them – which you cannot know – or that people are paid, or their personality traits, or somebody else. What interests me is the arguments people put. I think most of the imputations made on all sides are probably inaccurate, but even if they were accurate they are irrelevant. A man or woman may be a one-eyed former contract killer with a cocaine habit in the pay of the state of Israel, but may still make an argument that is absolutely correct. Please address the argument, not the person. Posts which fail to do this will be deleted when seen.
Regards.
Josh R, I too am concerned about accepting a vaccine which has been so rapidly developed and for which data has been gathered over such a short time, and which may interact with new SARS-CoV-2 variants in ways as yet unknown.
But I am going to accept one, because vaccination is the best option, certainly for society and quite probably for myself, that my incompetent, corrupt and ideologically blinkered government has left me with.
You are clearly aware that we’re all constantly immersed in propaganda. Our challenge is more than knowing that information is biased and corrupted; we also have to work out how to achieve more accurate understanding, and crucially, to account for the propaganda’s multi-generational effects upon our own outlooks and assumptions. You wrote:
– “Having an income & the means to support yourself is pretty “mandatory” in the real world, […] So whilst not mandatory in the strictest sense of the word, it is punitively coercive and I don’t see much of a practical distinction between the two.”
Humans develop highly specialised skills compared with other species, and consequently we support each other far more than we each support ourselves. “Supporting ourselves” is a long-term propaganda term which really means earning money by taking orders from some (usually commercial) power structure. It deflects responsibility from the commercial system of employment onto individuals who aren’t currently employed. It’s a latent guilt-trip term. In the same sense, “in the real world” is a propaganda term for “in the current political-economic environment”; a false presupposition that no other systems of organisation are possible.
Propaganda controls us by infiltrating our very thinking.
Rightly, the pandemic should have made us transform the political-economic system, but so many of its tenets are so deeply indoctrinated into our thinking and even our language, collectively, and literally prior to each person’s infancy, that without deep reflection we cannot even notice them, let alone question or challenge them. So instead, many of us react on more consciously accessible levels, eg. we wonder, is covid-19 really as bad as we’re being told? Is vaccination really safer? Or are these claims just propaganda?
Vaccination is safer than covid-19 for society, and within the politically chosen covid conditions of most countries. There is a safer way, but most governments have not even considered it. And again we collide with our political-economic conditioning because individualism has become so pervasive that we think about both infection and vaccination individualistically, almost eclipsing the collective perspective.
Subliminal divide and conquer was doing so well, wasn’t it? And then came covid. Let’s turn towards each other rather than against.
SA
“antivaxxers”
Yawn! up pops that well worn & utterly predictable trope. Good that you waited till the end of your reply to slip it in, otherwise I’d have dropped off before reading the rest of what you had to type.
“First you bemoan the fact that they were exposed to danger…”
Perhaps I didn’t express my thoughts as coherently as I’d hoped, but I was not intending to “bemoan” their predicament, I had hoped to elevate it to something akin to a heroic & selfless effort under the conditions as they appeared, perhaps worthy of not writing them off if they subsequently express a reluctance to get jabbed.
I have no direct knowledge of what life has been like over there for you all or for care workers in particular. A more careful reading of the paragraph you quoted might suggest that I don’t even assert with any confidence this “danger” you assert I felt they’d been exposed to:
“…what was presented as…”
“…supposedly dangerous…”
“…apparently posed to them….”“One hopes that those indulging in healthcare are able to differentiate between data about vaccine safety and efficacy and propaganda broadcasted by antivaxxers.”
I readily admit that people in this field may, even more so than the average person, be able to differentiate between propaganda & safety & efficacy data. On that basis, I am particularly interested when such large numbers of people in the medical profession & frontline staff are expressing a reluctance to join the trials.
Of course, I’m assuming the premise behind your last paragraph is the myopic assumption that anything contradicting the demands to get jabbed is mindless “propaganda” and all the “data” is in support of the government diktat, which is a pretty hopeful & mindless presumption on both counts.
I don’t do Facebook or Twitter and, when it comes to such important questions of health & well being, I don’t take my cue from polemic comments on line.
But when VPs & chief scientific officers of the very companies bringing products to market raise concerns, I pay attention.
When someone within the very institutions & companies spearheading the rush to jab the lot of us, with a resume brimming full of “senior program officer-global health vaccine discovery (BMGF)”, “director, research program leader head of adjuvants”, “chief innovation & scientific officer”, “global project director influenza vaccines”, “program manager (GAVI)”, “head of adjuvant technologies (GSK)”, is jumping out of his skin urging caution & warning of inherent dangers, I listen.
That list goes on & on over the past 12 months, of people with no conflict of interest except their interest expressed through the Hippocratic oath, common sense and concern for humanity, backed up by lifetime careers in their respective fields. It’s science! and all about discussion, with some opinions eventually proving more correct or knowledgeable than others.
It should not be about political diktats, suppressing dissenting opinions & over paid behavioural scientists & perception managers trying to massage the public will, through fear & hatred, to conform to ages old, pre established aims set out in vainglorious efforts such as Event 201 or the WEF’s arse buggering Great Reset.And perhaps those care workers you’d gladly cast on the scrap heap now they’ve served their purpose at the “coal face” might know something you don’t.
Like I said in my comment to glenn_uk, if you want to give it a go, good luck to you & I wish you well, but drop the “holier than thou” bullsh!t & stop regurgitating the facile ad hominem attacks at people expressing their perfectly rational concerns (I’ve seen them pop up regularly in the comments section).
Or don’t! it’s still a free world, in theory, so type what you want.Personally, I won’t be suspending critical thought & placing my faith in some foppish, Bullingdon eejit & his assorted sycophants, or in utterly compromised, regulatory institutions staffed by revolving door, Pharma profiteers, financed by a specky twat who used to sell computers before getting caught indulging his faintly eugenicist leanings in India, Nigeria & Kenya.
I can say with certainty that I won’t be joining the experimental gene therapy (mRNA) trials, even when they are finalised in 2022 or 2023, quite possibly. I may consider one of the other more traditional ‘vaccines’, if they prove to be just that i.e they prevent infection & transmission rather than simply suppressing symptoms (& haven’t killed too many people in the meantime).
I’ve had any number of vaccines/medical interventions over the years & love the advances being made in these fields.
But I’ve also had any number of opportunities to see just how shockingly inept, disingenuous & depraved politicians, Pharma peddlers & other sociopathic profiteers can be over the past 20 or 30 years, so I wouldn’t bet my life on them.fair point…..
not that it applies to me or the comments here in response to my vitriolic ranting, but can I assume this convention applies to labelling people “conspiracy theorists” or “antivaxxer” too?
just out of interest
For the record:
I would recommend anyone who has the opportunity to have any of the Sars-Cov-2 vaccines to avail of it. I am not advocating a stance against these vaccines.
Whilst I think it is highly unlikely that these or any other vaccines will have serious long term side effects we just don’t and cannot definitively know that yet for these Sars-Cov-2 vaccines. There is simply no getting around that.This is not the argument here. Making something mandatory is a whole other step. Mandatory training is one thing, mandatory vaccination is another entirely different thing. If I feel like running in ifront of the nearest bus whilst sitting through yet another manual handling mandatory training session it isn’t really affecting me apart from pure boredom. A vaccination or other treatment that affects the internal milieu of my own body and no one else’s is an entirely different thing. I am aware that were I to refuse vaccination and subsequently become infected with Sars-Cov-2 and infect others that my refusal to be vaccinated possibly contributed to that situation. keep in mind that no vaccine is 100% effective and I may have caught the infection despite being vaccinated.
That again is a separate argument. The vaccination, in and of itself, affects me and only me in terms of what it may or may not do to my body and, for the moment, putting aside it’s possible beneficial effects to me and others. It is a fundamental tenet of medical care that anyone, assuming they have the mental capacity to consent, has the right to refuse treatment even if such refusal is considered not to be in their best interests. Mandatory vaccination or mandatory any other treatment encroaches on that right. Regardless of any justification for doing so that it encroaches on that right is extant.The argument then shifts. Under which circumstances is “society” justified to encroach that right? There is precedent in the medical profession. Despite no one in the UK becoming infected with HIV from medical treatment there was concern that those health care staff involved in high risk procedures could transmit HIV if they were infected. From 2003 all such staff had to be tested. Strangely, those employed before 2003 didn’t have to be tested. The new rules didn’t apply to those already in employment. Here is a Guardian article from 2003. Hep B vaccination is another example. I suspect military personnel also have to accept vaccinations and treatments. I am thinking here of “gulf war syndrome” if it exists.
“Mandatory is not the same as a condition of employment”
This is true as shown above with HIV testing for certain healthcare workers. However mandatory something as a condition of continued employment is a different concept. Again, same as the fact they didn’t test those employed before 2003.
Disregarding vaccines and the differing view points on vaccines alone making anything mandatory and specifically anything that affects your own body with a potential for harm, no matter how remote represents a fundamental shift in the framework for such things. Society needs to be very careful of such a step.
Josh R, what will it take to get you to calm down? You wrote:
– “when it comes to such important questions of health & well being, I don’t take my cue from polemic comments on line”
so by that standard, should I not ignore your comments too?
There most certainly is conspiracy theory and anti-vax propaganda; myself and SA have tried discussing with those who argue in such ways; it is exhausting and unenlightening and, I’m sorry to say, your discussion style, with its references to Event 201 and the Great Reset, and your apparent denial of the dangers of SARS-CoV-2, and your apparent confusion of opinion with evidence, seem to be tending in that direction.
So what does it take to get you to calm down?
Josh R, to save the moderators from posting a note, which they are reluctant to do, “conspiracy theorist” and “antivaxxer” are not imputation of motive, they are description of position, like “left wing” and “right wing”. An example of imputation of motive would be if I were to insinuate that you’re an employee of a foreign government agency, working from a boiler room of trolls trying to maximise the death rate in countries your government officially deems to be their enemies.
Here we are arguing about whether society can ask someone to be altruistic enough to have a vaccine with so far good safety record and with some proven efficacy in a rather difficult situation affecting the health of a sizeable number in the population but also with a major effect on society. Altruism however seems dead. But we as a society are quite happy to ask many young people to be trained to kill and if necessary also die with little benefit to themselves other than a salary. So if we have a very highly moral society then why are all those protesting about vaccinating front line workers as a condition of employment, but I see no outrage against military recruitment.
E.T. it would be possible to ask those who do not want to be vaccinated not to be front line workers and have other less exposed roles in the NHS.
Josh R, apologies, you don’t sound like the classic antivaxxer but the use of such words as an experimental gene therapy vaccine, sounds very much like a phrase taken out from some of the websites that advocate antivaccine teachings.
” it would be possible to ask those who do not want to be vaccinated not to be front line workers and have other less exposed roles in the NHS.”
In the case of hospitals doctors, nurses, porters, care assistants etc will all have some patient contact and for most patient contact will be the largest component of their job. For most doctors rotas their numbers reflect the bare minimum needed to fulfil the 48 hour max average week. Losing even one doc messes that up. Similarly for nurses and midwives, they are already short staffed. being realistic, as a doc or nurse/midwife you ain’t much use to anyone if you can’t see patients. Similarly for care staff in nursing homes etc, the majority of the work involves patient/resident contact.
Perhaps a handful could be accommodated but no more than that.I don’t think it is an issue of altruism, those with altruistic view points will likely have their vaccine anyway. There is a good deal of push back even from the care home operators. Also, as I was trying to express in my previous post the question goes beyond the immediate considerations of the Sars-Cov-2 vaccines.
Josh R: What a load of hysterical blather from you. Try to calm down and go for quality rather than verbosity. That way, if you actually have a point, we might be able to see what it is. Ever bothered trying to understand a point, when its maker is providing it in a spittle-flecked rant?
Where are you, anyway? It would be nice to know where your perspective is coming from. A small introduction before taking to the floor and blasting away would have been polite. Maybe there are no manners where you come from?
Nobody is being forced to work in a nursing home. If they did, they have a duty of care to their charges – and that includes not being subject to a deadly disease where it can be avoided.
What is your problem anyway – these rules to protect others? Vaccines generally, or just this one? The notion that Covid-19 itself exists or is deadly?
Try to explain yourself instead of coming across as you have done so far – and I’m far to polite to say what that is.
E.T
Front line staff are those dealing intensively with patients in ITU for example. Others may have much less exposure to direct covid patients. I presume the NHS still has other than covid patients?SA – “Altruism however seems dead”
That is merely the impression on social media such as this. Thankfully the majority have more moderate views. I suspect that small-scale, manually moderated websites such as this one are being turned to as those with more extreme views migrate from the major sites such as Facebook and Twitter where censorship is automated by algorithms.
“Front line staff are those dealing intensively with patients in ITU for example. Others may have much less exposure to direct covid patients. I presume the NHS still has other than covid patients?”
Yes, to an extent, but most covid patients don’t end up on ITU. There is a potential for virus transmission from anyone you see. Keep in mind that mandating a vaccine for staff is mainly aimed at protecting patients/care home residents from staff and to an extent other staff. Also keep in mind that the telegraph article stated that this legal requirement is directed at care home staff and not hospital staff.
“Care home workers will be required by law to have a Covid-19 jab under a historic legal change agreed by Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock, The Telegraph can reveal.”
“If the law change is voted through, it is likely that the vast majority of the 1.5 million people who work in England’s adult social care sector would be legally bound to have a Covid vaccination.”
Read through the whole article.
I suspect that there will not be a real need for compulsory vaccination of care workers. It would be needed mostly if infection prevalence were to again soar. Current infection prevalence is well under a tenth of its peak in January, it’s still falling, we’re still under restrictions and a majority of workers will get vaccinated voluntarily, many already are.
I know what went on in the care home where a friend of mine works. Staff were complaining of covid symptoms but management were insisting they continue to come in to work. Lateral flow tests were coming up negative until too late; the management may even have deliberately sourced tests with a bad false negative rate just to keep staff working.
The government are making a show of “doing something” when it was the government’s own delay in implementing restrictions, its own failure to control employers, its own failure to hold the press to account that created the problem. So now they’re acting all tough; it’s clear they never learned that effective discipline can only ever start with oneself.
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by
