Coronavirus - Part Two.

[hackey lad 3,949]

11 minutes 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?

Best to keep adding another couple of weeks on , if it helps us.

[RollingJ 1,999]

1 minute ago, hackey lad said:

Best to keep adding another couple of weeks on , if it helps us.

For how long though? We need to make some attempt to regain normality, otherwise we might as well just all hibernate for ever.

[hackey lad 3,949]

12 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

For how long though? We need to make some attempt to regain normality, otherwise we might as well just all hibernate for ever.

I agree with you but after all this time , even if its , say another three months then surely its worth it .

[Thirsty Relic 208]

1 hour ago, RollingJ said:

For how long though? We need to make some attempt to regain normality, otherwise we might as well just all hibernate for ever.

Restrictions will remain for as long as it takes for Boris to roll out vaccinations for all adults, because he daren't bring in the anticipated Covid vaccination proof that his cronies want contracts for to allow pub entry etc for until then, because he'd have riots if the 18-30's can't get a pint and the rest of us can!  Then of course, those who have decided not to get vaccinated will have a choice - vaccine or no pub!

 

Deaths, hospital admissions are down, the NHS is prepared for surge in cases as lockdown ends, medication is in place to protect against serious illness even when the un-vaccinated are infected, and we are told that vaccines protect against known variants.  Logically, we should be opening up now!

[catmiss 12]

As restrictions are lifted, to the relief of many individuals, businesses and ‘the economy’, perhaps it’s time for people to do their own risk assessment and engage in the activities/take precautions they feel comfortable with 

[Thirsty Relic 208]

Well, like many people I've been almost a prisoner in my house for the last year or so, therefore I'm nervous about going out again, and am certainly not going to go mad in a few hours time (or even on June 21st or whenever).   Hopefully, gradually I'll get back to normal!

 

[Guest sibon]

7 minutes ago, catmiss said:

As restrictions are lifted, to the relief of many individuals, businesses and ‘the economy’, perhaps it’s time for people to do their own risk assessment and engage in the activities/take precautions they feel comfortable with 

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.

[The_DADDY 3,460]

1 minute 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.

My bold. 

Outrageous suggestion. 

You have the experimental injection if you like (due to end trials in 2023) but to suggest anyone who won't take the experimental injection is sanctioned is pure discrimination. 

[Thirsty Relic 208]

1 minute ago, sibon said:

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.

 

 

So, we all pay for the HNS and the extra Covid measures through our taxes, and will be paying for this pandemic for years to come, and yet you want to make a section of taxpayers take out extra insurance cover for something they have already paid for, and will still be continuing to pay for?

[Guest sibon]

7 minutes ago, Thirsty Relic said:

So, we all pay for the HNS and the extra Covid measures through our taxes, and will be paying for this pandemic for years to come, and yet you want to make a section of taxpayers take out extra insurance cover for something they have already paid for, and will still be continuing to pay for?

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

 

That’s all. The jab is safe. Take it. 
 

If you don’t want the NHS approved jab, then look after yourself.

[catmiss 12]

12 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.

Isn’t deciding not to be vaccinated the result of an individual’s own risk assessment? The NHS wouldn’t expect someone who engaged in other ‘risky’ activities to be covered by insurance. 

[Guest sibon]

8 minutes ago, catmiss said:

Isn’t deciding not to be vaccinated the result of an individual’s own risk assessment? The NHS wouldn’t expect someone who engaged in other ‘risky’ activities to be covered by insurance. 

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.

Edited May 16, 2021 by sibon