The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, Miggins said:

So sorry, @G STAR RAM! I understand your post. I missed my colleagues of 10 years when our garden centre closed down during the pandemic and then didn't open again. I felt lost and the lack of routine threatened my mental stability. I have never not worked in 41 years and to be laid off seemed very wrong.

I lived alone, like you, for about 10 years, and if I hadn't had a full time job as a teacher and had the delightfully funny company of the children and my colleagues I don't know where I would be now. Hope that you are in a good place now as well!?

Thanks, all is good, I have 2 kids that help keep me young and healthy...well kind of!

The winter was a very dark time but hopefully thats all in the past now.

[Archied]

7 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

People get vaccinated for all sorts of things all the time.

Yes from diseases that pose a real danger to they’re lives with vaccines that pose less or no threat to them than the disease ,very much not the case here,

if people are so so righteous about keeping others safe how do they square this one away without giving the game away that it’s all just selfish keeping themselves safe from a virus they have a 98% chance of surviving ??‍♂️
the day when a child dies from a vaccine they didn’t need ,given without a parents consent is a massive game changer for society and even the un hidden stats tell us that is very much possible, never mind long term heart problems in children who have a reaction and survive ,

and that’s ok ??‍♂️,,shame on us 

[Wolfie]

3 hours ago, Archied said:

Yes from diseases that pose a real danger to they’re lives with vaccines that pose less or no threat to them than the disease ,very much not the case here,

if people are so so righteous about keeping others safe how do they square this one away without giving the game away that it’s all just selfish keeping themselves safe from a virus they have a 98% chance of surviving ??‍♂️

How is it selfish to want to protect yourself from a disease that has a 2% chance of killing you? - I don't know if that's accurate but I'll go with it....

Would you willingly play russian roulette with a gun that gave you those odds?. Pretty sure I wouldn't, thanks.

3 hours ago, Archied said:

the day when a child dies from a vaccine they didn’t need ,given without a parents consent is a massive game changer for society and even the un hidden stats tell us that is very much possible, never mind long term heart problems in children who have a reaction and survive ,

and that’s ok ??‍♂️,,shame on us 

Agreed and that's why I call BS and it wouldn't happen. That clickbait said it was being planned. No, it's being considered, along with loads of other scenarios.

[Archied]

21 minutes ago, Wolfie said:

How is it selfish to want to protect yourself from a disease that has a 2% chance of killing you? - I don't know if that's accurate but I'll go with it....

Would you willingly play russian roulette with a gun that gave you those odds?. Pretty sure I wouldn't, thanks.

Agreed and that's why I call BS and it wouldn't happen. That clickbait said it was being planned. No, it's being considered, along with loads of other scenarios.

On your first point I call it selfish to be happy to put children at risk to protect yourself( not you personally, the general ethics) from this virus with this survival percentage , even before it s clear  and accepted that the vaccinated can and do still catch COVID and spread it, am I prepared to play Russian roulette with they’re own and other people’s children? Not a chance , I would swap my life to save the live of any of my children and the natural instinct of people is to protect and save children ,,, what the hell is going on when we are even considering this ?

listen to the noises coming from government, it IS being considered 

Edited August 27, 2021 by Archied

[RoyMac5]

3 hours ago, Archied said:

Yes from diseases that pose a real danger to they’re lives with vaccines that pose less or no threat to them than the disease ,very much not the case here,

Covid: Vaccine complications dwarfed by virus risks - BBC News

"Lead author Prof Julia Hippisley-Cox said it was important people were aware of the risks, but that they were kept in context given the higher risk from being infected.

Fellow author Prof Aziz Sheikh added the findings "clearly underscore" the importance of getting vaccinated to reduce the risk of these clotting and bleeding outcomes.

Vaccinations, he said, offer a "substantial public health benefit".

[Wolfie]

25 minutes ago, Archied said:

On your first point I call it selfish to be happy to put children at risk to protect yourself

I agree with that. Of course.

25 minutes ago, Archied said:

listen to the noises coming from government, it IS being considered 

That's what I said. It's being considered, though, along with loads of other options and the clickbait media just latched onto the most controversial option as usual and tried to create a storm (and advertising revenue) from it.

[maxjam]

1 minute ago, Wolfie said:

That's what I said. It's being considered, though, along with loads of other options and the clickbait media just latched onto the most controversial option as usual and tried to create a storm (and advertising revenue) from it.

Whilst I agree that the clickbait media latched onto it, it is interesting to see how different media outlets covered the story;

1.  Talk Radio runs with 'The NHS has drawn up plans to vaccinate 12 to 15 year olds at school without needing parental consent'

2. The Telegrath has 'The NHS has drawn up plans to vaccinate 12 to 15 year olds at school without needing parental consent' as its subtitle.

3.  The Guardian didn't deem it worthy of mention.

IMHO vaccinating children is unnecessary and vaccinating them at school without parental permission is shocking.  I personally don't have a problem with Talk Radio's approach as its an important story that parents should be aware of.  The Telegraph took a more considered approach, adding it to their subtitle and mentioning it rationally in their article, whereas Guardian readers would have no idea their children had been jabbed until they came home from school with a plaster on their arm. 

Sometimes a bit of sensationalism is a good thing.

[Stive Pesley]

21 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Whilst I agree that the clickbait media latched onto it, it is interesting to see how different media outlets covered the story;

1.  Talk Radio runs with 'The NHS has drawn up plans to vaccinate 12 to 15 year olds at school without needing parental consent'

2. The Telegrath has 'The NHS has drawn up plans to vaccinate 12 to 15 year olds at school without needing parental consent' as its subtitle.

3.  The Guardian didn't deem it worthy of mention.

IMHO vaccinating children is unnecessary and vaccinating them at school without parental permission is shocking.  I personally don't have a problem with Talk Radio's approach as its an important story that parents should be aware of.  The Telegraph took a more considered approach, adding it to their subtitle and mentioning it rationally in their article, whereas Guardian readers would have no idea their children had been jabbed until they came home from school with a plaster on their arm. 

Sometimes a bit of sensationalism is a good thing.

But I still think that 1 & 2 are factually misrepresented. It's not a new plan that has been drawn-up. The NHS guidelines have allowed children 12 to 15 to be receive ANY medical procedure without parental consent for a long time. But the key point being missed is that, in order for it to happen, the child in question has to convince a medical professional that they fully understand everything about the procedure, including the risks, and have an ability to clearly explain their rationale. There are clear and strict guidelines to follow, and even the slightest cause for doubt is enough to deny the child's request. Essentially the child has to prove themselves mature enough to show adult thinking - for 12-15 yr olds, that's pretty rare

So the number of 12-15 year olds who may end up getting the covid vaccine without parental consent is very very low - and would only apply in cases where the child is able to prove themselves Gillick competent (ie capable of adult thinking)

Therefore it's not "shocking" - in actual fact, you are denying someone their freedom of choice if you are against it. And that's far worse

You surprise me actually @maxjambecause you're normally pro-freedom. I know from previous conversations that we both have older kids who have decided against taking the vaccine, and we're both OK with that being their choice, because we fundamentally believe people should be able to choose

I'm wondering if you feel it's shocking simply because that's what the sensationalist media want you to feel?

 

 

[maxjam]

18 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

You surprise me actually @maxjambecause you're normally pro-freedom. I know from previous conversations that we both have older kids who have decided against taking the vaccine, and we're both OK with that being their choice, because we fundamentally believe people should be able to choose

I'm wondering if you feel it's shocking simply because that's what the sensationalist media want you to feel?

I find it shocking because throughout the pandemic we have seen the Govt and media continually move the goalposts, restrict open debate and place limits on our inherent freedoms without much, if any, mainstream opposition.  I don't like the direction we're heading in.

Vaccine passports and vaccinations for under 18s, especially the 12-15 age group they are now thinking about jabbing at school without parental consent probably after a short Govt propaganda lesson are things I feel very strongly about - especially given the mounting evidence that renders both pointless.

Very early during the pandemic I said I was happy to go along with Govt restrictions and lockdowns as we were entering the unknown, but voiced concern that we wouldn't get back everything we'd lost.  We need to be mindful that covid-19 doesn't turn into covid-1984.  

The Govt has often dropped things into the media during the past 20 months to soften us up prior to officially announcing them, if it takes a bit of sensationalism to bring it to peoples attention then so be it.  Its just a pity that Guardian readers don't know what all the fuss is about.

[Stive Pesley]

10 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Vaccine passports and vaccinations for under 18s, especially the 12-15 age group they are now thinking about jabbing at school without parental consent probably after a short Govt propaganda lesson are things I feel very strongly about - especially given the mounting evidence that renders both pointless.

OK - so your problem is with the govt messaging/information around the vaccine rather than the Gillick competency test

Allowing kids of 12-15 who are capable of proving that they have mature adult thought processes to access medical care and procedures that their parents may not consent to is a fundamental human right in my eyes

But you're doubting that the information they receive specifically on the Covid vaccine is transparent or balanced - i can see that, and it concerns me too. Let's be honest, the decision to have the vaccine or not is a really bloody difficult one for ALL adults, especially  under 40s and I'm just hopeful that the number of kids who want to over-rule their parents AND actually pass the Gillick test is mercifully low

I just take issue with the sensationalist framing of the issue. No child is actually going to get the vaccine without some form of considered personal consent 

 

 

[kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong]

5 hours ago, Archied said:

Yes from diseases that pose a real danger to they’re lives with vaccines that pose less or no threat to them than the disease ,very much not the case here,

if people are so so righteous about keeping others safe how do they square this one away without giving the game away that it’s all just selfish keeping themselves safe from a virus they have a 98% chance of surviving ??‍♂️
the day when a child dies from a vaccine they didn’t need ,given without a parents consent is a massive game changer for society and even the un hidden stats tell us that is very much possible, never mind long term heart problems in children who have a reaction and survive ,

and that’s ok ??‍♂️,,shame on us 

Sorry mate,you usually talk sense but this is nonsense.

[maxjam]

29 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Allowing kids of 12-15 who are capable of proving that they have mature adult thought processes to access medical care and procedures that their parents may not consent to is a fundamental human right in my eyes

But you're doubting that the information they receive specifically on the Covid vaccine is transparent or balanced - i can see that, and it concerns me too. Let's be honest, the decision to have the vaccine or not is a really bloody difficult one for ALL adults, especially  under 40s and I'm just hopeful that the number of kids who want to over-rule their parents AND actually pass the Gillick test is mercifully low

Thats the key bit though isn't it.  

Throughout the pandemic the Govt have used fear tactics at every stage;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/02/state-fear-ministers-used-covert-tactics-keep-scared-public/

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1388315/coronavirus-feat-tactics-psychology-british-public

How can we trust them to give kids balanced information?  

There seems to be a rush to vaccinate everyone, even those that don't need the jab with something that we simply don't know what the long term effects may be.  I'd agree that the chances of any long term effects maybe low, but its also not zero. 

Why the rush to vaccinate children, especially the younger age groups, potentially against the wishes of parents when they have still got 5 years of being in an age bracket that is barely effected by both covid and long covid?  Because they are potential carriers?  Well so are vaccinated people - and if you yourself are vaccinated anyway it renders the whole argument null and void. 

We can't risk the health of our children to protect adults without a 100% cast iron guarantee that there will be no long term adverse effects.  If that means that a 12yo has to wait until they are 18 to get a jab then so be it.  Its not really up for discussion imo.

I think like a lot of parents I had never heard of the Gillick test until yesterday and would reasonably assume that any vaccination of my child would need my consent.  Whilst I may not like sensationalist media, nor the media in general tbh, I think in this instance I'm happy to turn a blind eye. 

We need to be able to question Govt more and have an open, honest debate about a lot of things going on in the world atm.  Vaccinating children is right up there with the most important of these.  Unfortunately we are being let down by our legacy media and silenced by social media.  

[Archied]

2 hours ago, Wolfie said:

I agree with that. Of course.

That's what I said. It's being considered, though, along with loads of other options and the clickbait media just latched onto the most controversial option as usual and tried to create a storm (and advertising revenue) from it.

Should not be considered at all in this scenario 

[therealhantsram]

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

Why the rush to vaccinate children, especially the younger age groups? 

This statement is incorrect. We are not rushing.

On the contrary, we are being very careful and considered in this country.

For comparison 12-15 year olds are already being vaccinated in France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, USA and more. 

As a result, France has now overtaken UK in overall vaccination rate despite its slow start. Netherlands, Sweden and France report over 40% of 12-15 year olds vaccinated, so this has been going on for quite some time. 

[Stive Pesley]

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

We can't risk the health of our children to protect adults without a 100% cast iron guarantee that there will be no long term adverse effects.  If that means that a 12yo has to wait until they are 18 to get a jab then so be it.  Its not really up for discussion imo.

Ok - that's where we differ then.

I think we should let all individuals (judged clinically capable of adult thought) choose what medical procedures and interventions they take

You want to deny that individual freedom and impose your will on them instead - just because you think you know what is best

 

[maxjam]

36 minutes ago, therealhantsram said:

This statement is incorrect. We are not rushing.

On the contrary, we are being very careful and considered in this country.

For comparison 12-15 year olds are already being vaccinated in France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, USA and more. 

As a result, France has now overtaken UK in overall vaccination rate despite its slow start. Netherlands, Sweden and France report over 40% of 12-15 year olds vaccinated, so this has been going on for quite some time. 

Depends how you define 'rush'.  

If you're giving drugs to people the benefits have to outweigh the risks.  The benefits of vaccinating children are minimal and we simply don't know whether there will be any long term risks.  I'll admit we can be pretty confident there won't be, but I don't want to vaccinate the vast majority of the population based on pretty confident.  

To me, rushing is vaccinating children without any real world long term data. 

[maxjam]

28 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Ok - that's where we differ then.

I think we should let all individuals (judged clinically capable of adult thought) choose what medical procedures and interventions they take

You want to deny that individual freedom and impose your will on them instead - just because you think you know what is best

Ok, lets let them vote, drink, drive and do the other stuff they aren't allowed to do then because as children they are capable of adult thought. 

If you are over 18, whether or not you have done your research into covid vaccines it is your choice as to whether you get the jab - thats your right.

If you are under 18 and there is very little evidence that the vaccines are providing you with any real protection above what you inherently have *and* there is no data available to show that the risks of taking such a vaccine might actually outweigh the benefits, then yes I hope people do see common sense and do what they know is best rather than submit to pressure from the Govt or thir peers. 

[SSD]

Derby Arena Vaccination Centre has now closed. Thank you to every volunteer, nurse, administrator etc who did an incredible job getting them thousands of people through the doors and being so quick and efficient. You've done Derby and Derbyshire so proud. Much love from a proud Derby man ❤

[Archied]

5 hours ago, therealhantsram said:

This statement is incorrect. We are not rushing.

On the contrary, we are being very careful and considered in this country.

For comparison 12-15 year olds are already being vaccinated in France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, USA and more. 

As a result, France has now overtaken UK in overall vaccination rate despite its slow start. Netherlands, Sweden and France report over 40% of 12-15 year olds vaccinated, so this has been going on for quite some time. 

Depends if you mean rush or rush compared to other countries , 

[Archied]

8 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

OK - so your problem is with the govt messaging/information around the vaccine rather than the Gillick competency test

Allowing kids of 12-15 who are capable of proving that they have mature adult thought processes to access medical care and procedures that their parents may not consent to is a fundamental human right in my eyes

But you're doubting that the information they receive specifically on the Covid vaccine is transparent or balanced - i can see that, and it concerns me too. Let's be honest, the decision to have the vaccine or not is a really bloody difficult one for ALL adults, especially  under 40s and I'm just hopeful that the number of kids who want to over-rule their parents AND actually pass the Gillick test is mercifully low

I just take issue with the sensationalist framing of the issue. No child is actually going to get the vaccine without some form of considered personal consent 

 

 

I can see some of your thinking but let’s be honest you have to be certain that the people giving the children information at school re jabs is balanced , I can honestly say I have seen the full range of obsessive s through this from full on conspiracy theorists threw to the real covid zealots and I find both extremes rather unpleasant and overbearing, never mind for children making sense of it??‍♂️