Coronavirus - Part Two.

[Guest makapaka]

32 minutes ago, sibon said:

A gold star for this post.

 

It really is time for people to take responsibility for themselves. 
 

We should begin by requiring those who refuse the vaccine to take out some health insurance to pay for treatment if they get the virus.

 

Then, we should let people know the risks of everyday settings and let them

get on with stuff if they want to.

I agree with everything up to the health insurance thing which is bats.

 

scrap that and I’m with you all the way.

[apelike 10]

27 minutes ago, sibon said:

No. I want those who decide to potentially place extra burdens on the NHS to take responsibility for their decision.

Would that also include the obese or smokers as well, after all they also drain resources and place extra burdens on the NHS.

 

[Guest sibon]

13 minutes ago, makapaka said:

I agree with everything up to the health insurance thing which is bats.

 

scrap that and I’m with you all the way.

Maybe we should get everyone to take out insurance against Covid. Then the market could decide the price for a vaccinated individual vs an unvaccinated one.

 

How do you think that would turn out?

[catmiss 12]

4 minutes ago, sibon said:

In this case, nobody is engaged in risky procedures. Covid can affect anyone. This is a medical emergency, the like of which we’ve never seen.

 

I don’t think it is unreasonable to expect people to take advantage of a free, safe vaccine. For the few who won’t, that is their choice, but they should also choose to deal with the consequences of that choice.

 

This isn’t about rock climbing, or smoking. This is a killer virus that we are trying to combat. People who believe that the trial doesn’t end until 2023, or that it contains a government tracker are a bit odd in my opinion. They are also a danger to the rest of us.

 

ETA: I should have made clear that I don’t include those who can’t take the vaccine, for health reasons.

I agree Covid can affect anyone, some may have mild illness, some more debilitating such as long Covid, some life threatening/death. Just as some smokers have bronchitis, some get COPD and some get lung cancer. Similar comparisons apply to rock climbing eg minor/life changing injuries/death. The NHS would be a very different service if it only provided for those who lived a ‘blameless’ life

[Guest sibon]

3 minutes ago, apelike said:

Would that also include the obese or smokers as well, after all they also drain resources and place extra burdens on the NHS.

 

To use one of your overused phrases, “see above”.

[Guest sibon]

1 minute ago, catmiss said:

I agree Covid can affect anyone, some may have mild illness, some more debilitating such as long Covid, some life threatening/death. Just as some smokers have bronchitis, some get COPD and some get lung cancer. Similar comparisons apply to rock climbing eg minor/life changing injuries/death. The NHS would be a very different service if it only provided for those who lived a ‘blameless’ life

I’ve a lot of sympathy for your point of view. But I do believe that this is a different case.

 

If you smoke/rock climb/ bungee jump, the risk is your own.

 

If you refuse the vaccine, the risk becomes more than your own. Unvaccinated people use up more resources and contribute to greater community transmission.
 

So, if vaccinated you and unvaccinated me were both needing the last ventilator, who gets it?

[Colin Foster 70]

Would appreciate it if they stopped sending me texts pestering me to book a vaccine.

[catmiss 12]

I think the same dilemma would apply if you needed ventilation due to pneumonia from an ineffectual treatment of chest infection or pneumonia from Covid

[apelike 10]

20 minutes ago, sibon said:

To use one of your overused phrases, “see above”.

Thanks for that. Glad to hear you have reconsidered it and changed your mind.

[redruby 279]

8 hours ago, RollingJ said:

And is that 'couple of weeks' going to be enough - are we going to keep on adding 'a couple of weeks' for ever?

As stated before, the end is sight due to vaccinations. But not enough people have been vaccinated yet to prevent exponential growth.  So no,  ‘a couple of weeks’ would not go on ‘forever’.  It may be we would need more than a couple of weeks but  it would not go indefinitely.

The trouble with pressing ahead now is that  there is a risk of causing a third wave at a point when the vaccination programme is incomplete. 
Tempting as it is to press on unlocking it increases the risk of being under restrictions for more time in the the long run. Who wants that and why take the gamble? The gamble may pay off but it’s one that shouldn’t be taken on peoples lives and health.

 

 

[RollingJ 2,040]

1 hour ago, redruby said:

As stated before, the end is sight due to vaccinations. But not enough people have been vaccinated yet to prevent exponential growth.  So no,  ‘a couple of weeks’ would not go on ‘forever’.  It may be we would need more than a couple of weeks but  it would not go indefinitely.

The trouble with pressing ahead now is that  there is a risk of causing a third wave at a point when the vaccination programme is incomplete. 
Tempting as it is to press on unlocking it increases the risk of being under restrictions for more time in the the long run. Who wants that and why take the gamble? The gamble may pay off but it’s one that shouldn’t be taken on peoples lives and health.

 

 

At what point are 'enough people vaccinated'? I would have thought, based on current reports, that we have very nearly reached that point, and as we really do need to - slowly, I agree, move back to normal life I personally cannot see why a gradual reduction in restrictions cannot take place now.

 

Your approach, with respect, would see a totally destroyed economy, massive unemployment - possibly worse than anything we have seen before (and people are already complaining loudly and correctly about the current figures), not to mention the physical and mental stress this is imposing on many.

 

You are possibly basing your opinion on the 'models' regularly trotted out by researchers, but based on the previous wildly inaccurate ones, I'm sorry, I won't.

[Mr Allen 0]

Link

 

The government are making an announcement on the 14th of June apparently, but up to now they're saying the Vaccine works on the new Indian variant of Covid-19 so all should go according to plan to let us out of "Prison" the week after.

 

Thoughts? I normally think Johnson talks out of his trousers but I trust him on this one.