Thereisalight.. Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 2 hours ago, Marshmallo said: Yip. Once my grandparents have had their second doses I'll be back to visiting them every couple of weeks. Grandparents?! Jeez I honestly thought you were about 50 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thereisalight.. Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 1 hour ago, Todd_is_God said: Mask wearing does bother me. Not when i'm in a supermarket or on a train etc, but when i'm at work. They are ok for short term use, but simply aren't comfortable to wear for circa 8 hours per day. I don't believe anyone who is required to wear one for the whole time they are at work would advocate them hanging around. I work 13 hrs shifts and when I come home my face (well the part the mask is covering) is similar to sun burn. Like you say, short time use in shops is very different to hours of wearing them 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soapy FFC Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 7 hours ago, Steven W said: Lizzie and the other one vaccinated. Gammon media should be good Be interesting to know how quickly they get the second jab, 3 or 12 weeks? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshmallo Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 6 minutes ago, Thereisalight.. said: Grandparents?! Jeez I honestly thought you were about 50 Wise beyond my years 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Bully Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Whilst we all hope you are right, it doesn't mean we can't criticise Devoid Sridhar's batshit mental ramblingsIt certainly started like that (and I agree it’s nonsense) but you read the last 5 or 6 pages, it gets more and more strident. I’m not sure this is good for a lot of peoples mental health. We need to remember the “batshit mental ramblings” are not those of a decision maker. Deep breaths everyone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 1 hour ago, Honest_Man#1 said: Might have misunderstood but if we are talking about being at the point of low hospitalisations and ICU rates and they are still not opening hospitality with no restrictions except possibly mask wearing then I don’t see that as remotely acceptable. Social distancing still being in place when the virus is reduced to very minor (or more likely none at all) symptoms for 99% of people who get it is ludicrous. Totally with you. Just speculating on how they sneak hospitality past the bullshit narrative of elimination. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Jean King Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Some female on the Sky news paper review claiming so far vaccination refusal rate is 21% which is disappointingly high given the demographic currently being offered it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8MileBU Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 4 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said: Some female on the Sky news paper review claiming so far vaccination refusal rate is 21% which is disappointingly high given the demographic currently being offered it. f**k ye then. NEXT! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd_is_God Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 36 minutes ago, Wee Bully said: It certainly started like that (and I agree it’s nonsense) but you read the last 5 or 6 pages, it gets more and more strident. I’m not sure this is good for a lot of peoples mental health. We need to remember the “batshit mental ramblings” are not those of a decision maker. Deep breaths everyone. You are right. But NS has previously said she listens very closely to what DS has to say. She's not some outlier lunatic; she is influential. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Jean King Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 f**k ye then. NEXT! Yes and no. I agree with the sentiment but that level of refusal amongst the most vulnerable isn't going to help reduce hospitalizations and deaths to a level to enable measures to be lifted. 90% efficacy plus 20+% refusal is going to extend the wait a fair bit.That said no idea who the person was or if that figure is remotely accurate but the Sky presenter made no attempt to challenge her on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Just now, Billy Jean King said: Yes and no. I agree with the sentiment but that level of refusal amongst the most vulnerable isn't going to help reduce hospitalizations and deaths to a level to enable measures to be lifted. 90% efficacy plus 20+% refusal is going to extend the wait a fair bit. That said no idea who the person was or if that figure is remotely accurate but the Sky presenter made no attempt to challenge her on it. Well it will given vaccine refusers won’t be taking up any resources, They will be left to die, and eventually chucked in the fire to get rid of their riddled body. Not much more than the cost of a standard funeral. Don’t want it your choice, but don’t fucking expect any help once you suffer the consequences. That is what is happening? If not why? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael W Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Sorry, but if people refuse the vaccine, that's tough shit for me. Once the vulnerable list has been done, they've made their choice and are on their own. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 3 minutes ago, Michael W said: Sorry, but if people refuse the vaccine, that's tough shit for me. Once the vulnerable list has been done, they've made their choice and are on their own. They are potentially infectious to the 5-10% of people for who the vaccine is not effective. Utter c***s 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 6 minutes ago, parsforlife said: Well it will given vaccine refusers won’t be taking up any resources, They will be left to die, and eventually chucked in the fire to get rid of their riddled body. Not much more than the cost of a standard funeral. Don’t want it your choice, but don’t fucking expect any help once you suffer the consequences. That is what is happening? If not why? Except that won’t happen, unfortunately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael W Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 5 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said: They are potentially infectious to the 5-10% of people for who the vaccine is not effective. Utter c***s Exactly. There are very limited circumstances I think refusal is justified, e.g. pregnancy, allergies to ingredients or medical reasons. The rest I imagine is purely down to anti-vax nonsense that they've picked up. One thing I sincerely hope for is that refusals do not cause delays for the rest of us whilst we try and persuade them. Let's keep moving. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 (edited) Folk continuing to ignore the fact that many people will have entirely valid reasons for refusing the vaccine, including pregnancy, breastfeeding, being immunocompromised, having autoimmune conditions or being allergic to any of the components of the vaccine. Probably not all of that 21% fall into that category, but a decent chunk might. Others might be "refusing" it because they're unable to attend the appointment they have been given for entirely valid reasons (eg working, childcare, self-isolating). My wife has been offered it and is currently having to weigh it up because there is conflicting advice about breastfeeding. She's currently on maternity leave anyway and would rather wait, but her worry is that it won't be easily available to her when she goes back if she doesn't get it now. The posters above seem to be advocating that she shouldn't be allowed to get it at all if she does refuse. Edited January 9, 2021 by craigkillie 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 And that people only have to consider their own risks if they ignore any remaining restrictions when most of the vulnerable have been vaccinated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8MileBU Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 (edited) 36 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said: Yes and no. I agree with the sentiment but that level of refusal amongst the most vulnerable isn't going to help reduce hospitalizations and deaths to a level to enable measures to be lifted. 90% efficacy plus 20+% refusal is going to extend the wait a fair bit. That said no idea who the person was or if that figure is remotely accurate but the Sky presenter made no attempt to challenge her on it. Yes and no. I’ve already seen folk having the debate about the 21% today and have to admit I felt myself agreeing with the stark reality of the harsh take on the situation. Obviously there are some genuinely valid medical reasons some will refuse the vaccine but for the rest - If vulnerable folk refuse the vaccine then you have to admit defeat. What is the other option? Is there another option? The NHS will be forced to soldier on until such time that enough other people have been vaccinated that herd immunity is inadvertently achieved by a combination of vaccination and the virus taking its toll on the vulnerable (through their own stupidity), albeit prolonging life alongside Covid for the rest of us until the virus fizzles out. There was some comparison I read about the eradication of smallpox too. Apparently some people declined to be vaccinated back then too, prolonging it but not meaning there was no end in sight, and therefore refusing the covid jab makes this is a repeat of that smallpox scenario. Again, far from ideal and just prolonging this Covid misery for the rest of us. But if folk refuse to be vaccinated, what can you realistically do short of strapping them to a chair and forcing a syringe into their arms? Edited January 9, 2021 by 8MileBU 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 (edited) 31 minutes ago, craigkillie said: Folk continuing to ignore the fact that many people will have entirely valid reasons for refusing the vaccine, including pregnancy, breastfeeding, being immunocompromised, having autoimmune conditions or being allergic to any of the components of the vaccine. Why would being 'immunocompromised' etc. constitute a refusal of the vaccine though? If there are valid medical grounds to not take the vaccine then it shouldn't be offered to those groups in the first place. And presumably they have been given that advice and it hasn't. Other than a temporary behavioural reason such as breast-feeding, I find it very hard to believe that the bulk of the above medical grounds are relevant factors in the rates of refusal then. And if you refuse a pre-booked vaccine appointment because och I'm meant to be working/watching the wean that day after the shitshow of the last ten months then no, either sort out your busy schedule or f**k off. We're not actually dragging people out of their houses at an hour's notice here - although if we did, then we'd probably get half as much bellyaching and excuses for not getting vaccinated. Edited January 10, 2021 by vikingTON 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest_Man#1 Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 20 minutes ago, welshbairn said: And that people only have to consider their own risks if they ignore any remaining restrictions when most of the vulnerable have been vaccinated. What exactly are you advocating here? Continuing restrictions indefinitely for wider society even after vulnerable groups that are at risk are vaccinated to stop the hospitalisations/deaths of the 5% or so who might still be susceptible (this number would be very small in relative terms)? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.