COVID-19 / Coronavirus Pandemic


levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
14,747
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
A long debate but well worth the read, not just for those in the UK to see how their legislators are acting, but also for those outside the UK whose own legislators may be considering - or have already implemented - the same sort of proposals:
Genuinely contains several seriously salient points.
Could you prepare a TLDR? I got lost amongst all the arguments for an impact assessment at the start and lost the will to live soon after that.
 

Linux-SWAT

Hardcore Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,963

Phlyra

Electric
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Messages
1,180
Could you prepare a TLDR? I got lost amongst all the arguments for an impact assessment at the start and lost the will to live soon after that.
Basically, asking Parliament to vote through mandating vaccination (for the first time in over 100 years) in an inconsistent fashion (only workers operating in care settings but not those being cared for, or NHS workers), especially without compelling reasons for doing so in the form of an impact assessment on which they could base their decision and without majority approval from those surveyed who provided feedback AND whilst having mislead Parliament in the process, is likely to be highly counterproductive when there’s so little trust in the govt. and they’re being very heavy handed rather than respond to the concerns of medical staff.
The govt. should instead take a leaf out of Wales and Scotland’s books, which have managed far higher levels of total vaccination amongst staff in care settings without needing to mandate it by law.

RE the lack of impact assessment provision, I think one of the best speeches made was, surprisingly enough, from a fellow Tory MP Christopher Chope:
“It is a pleasure to follow Dr Allin-Khan. I am delighted that the Official Opposition share my view and that of many of my colleagues that these are bad regulations and that they should be opposed this evening.

Both the Welsh and Scottish Governments, as I understand it, are against this type of regulation. The Minister told us that other Administrations were watching, but this Administration should be watching what the other Administrations are doing and following their lead. I must say that this was probably the most depressing performance from a Minister that I have listened to in this House. She showed a cavalier disregard for the conventions and courtesies of this House, and, as she has admitted to, she completely breached the rules under the Government’s better regulation framework, which is designed to inform decision making for regulations that affect businesses and individuals in this country. When criticised, the Minister’s response is best described as dumb insolence, and that is just not good enough. One question that I would have liked to ask in an intervention was: what is the Government’s rationale for not requiring care home residents to be vaccinated?

These regulations were laid on 22 June. There was an accompanying explanatory memorandum that expressly referenced a full impact assessment. It said:

“A full impact assessment of the costs and benefits of this instrument is available from the Department of Health and Social Care…and is published alongside this instrument and its Explanatory Memorandum”.

The Minister has not explained what has happened to it, whether it ever existed, and whether it contained information that she found embarrassing and has therefore been suppressed.

An impact assessment is not an optional extra. As the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee made clear in its report of 6 July: “An impact assessment is a fundamental tool for those who wish to scrutinise legislation before nodding it through”. Indeed, an impact assessment should be cleared by the Minister before the proposals are brought forward. The Government’s better regulation framework principles, set out in March 2020, says:

“Where government intervention requires a legislative or policy change to be made, departments are expected to analyse and assess the impact of the change on the different groups affected – which should generally take the form of an impact assessment.”

That has not happened. Why has it not happened? I put down some parliamentary questions about this, because I feared that we would not get the impact assessment, and those questions have received holding answers rather than substantive answers. One asked what estimate he has made

“of the number of employees in…England who will face dismissal from their employment as a result of the enactment of regulations …and whether those staff will be eligible for compensation”.

There was not an answer to that, and there has not been one so far today. I then asked what estimate has been made

“of the number of staff employed in care homes in England who have not been vaccinated against covid-19 for (a) clinical reasons and (b) reasons of personal choice including religion, belief and conscience”.

Again, no answers—not even to parliamentary questions. How can we hold the Government to account if they will not even answer our questions?

My constituents are absolutely livid about what is being proposed. I will not quote extensively from a letter that I received from Mr Davis from Ferndown, but he says that it is completely wrong and unethical and that it makes no sense. An NHS consultant in Christchurch says that, “Mandatory vaccination would be crossing the Rubicon on medical choice, medical confidentiality and bodily autonomy.” These are vital elements of the right to privacy. A Christchurch care home manager to whom I have spoken has said that the whole proposal “undermines” the need for parity of esteem between care workers and NHS workers.

You may have seen, Madam Deputy Speaker, the article in the British Medical Journal on 8 July, which says that, while it may reduce the risk of transmission, vaccination

“is not a panacea for safety”.

Why are we not saying that people who have had previous infection and got immunity from that are exempt from these regulations? I think that this is an unnecessary, disproportionate and misguided proposal. I hope that, given what has happened in Scotland and Wales, we reject these regulations and put the Minister out of her misery.”

RE the consequences of such a piece of legislation, probably the best speech was by MP Dr. Rosina Allin-Khan:
“The UK Government should learn from the fantastic work of the Labour-led Welsh Government, who are running the fastest vaccine programme in the world and have vaccinated a far greater proportion of their staff than England; yesterday’s figures showed that almost 95% of care home residents and 88% of care home staff are double vaccinated. Wales has rejected compulsory vaccinations and instead chosen to work closely with the care sector to drive take-up, as well as valuing the workforce with a proper pay rise. That is the sort of leadership that is needed here.

A failure of leadership here will place the care sector in an even more precarious situation, with even fewer staff than at present. There are serious warnings from the care sector that the Government’s plan could lead to staff shortages in already understaffed care homes. That would have disastrous consequences on the quality of care. More than 100,000 posts in the care sector are currently unfilled, with recruitment and retention already extremely difficult due to low wage levels for difficult and demanding jobs. Not only could this plan have a disastrous impact on those relying on care, but the stress and trauma placed on their relatives will affect so many across the country. We already have a social care crisis. Let us not deepen it.

These proposals are at odds with the Government’s decision to throw caution to the wind by making social distancing and mask wearing optional and up to individuals to decide on. It makes no sense. Surely forcing workers to receive a vaccine is at odds with the individualism that the Government seek to promote at every opportunity. It seems odd that care workers are being singled out. Why is there a different rule for them? Are the Government hoping that the public will simply forget about their failure to protect care homes over the past year? Is that what is going on here?

Forcing carers to choose between losing their job and taking a vaccine that they are afraid of is inhumane. These are people who often work for less than the minimum wage. They are incredibly vulnerable people and their voices must be heard. Many of these people have lost multiple family members during the pandemic. They are being asked to put their faith in a vaccine that they are afraid of. The Government need to be doing more to tackle misinformation, promote the positive benefits of taking up the vaccine and support care home staff to do so. They have not been doing enough to support care workers who have done so much during the crisis. They should be focused on driving up standards and staff retention by treating care workers as the professionals they are, with improved pay, terms and conditions and training.

We have a moral imperative not to force people to take a vaccine that they are afraid of, so I urge the Government to listen to our care workforce. Surely they deserve at least that after the last year.”
 
Last edited:

Phlyra

Electric
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Messages
1,180
"Prof Robert West says rhetoric about caution is ‘a way of putting blame on public".
Exactly what some of us said here in March 2020 when we witnessed that western governments were letting people die like dogs.
Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t some of those fellow forum members advocating against lockdowns, mask mandates and social distancing...?
 

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
14,747
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
Differnt forum members have different opinions on these things, and in this thread in particular, often some extremely different opinions. I've given up trying to remember who believes what but I'm rarely surprised by some of the positions taken in this thread.
 

Linux-SWAT

Hardcore Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,963
Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t some of those fellow forum members advocating against lockdowns, mask mandates and social distancing...?
I speak for myself: at the very beginning I believed it was a real/natural virus crisis so I thought that a hard lockdown + masks everywhere were needed like in China (which was successful btw).
Then I realized that western governments did nothing worthless, that's why it was the same mess everywhere so it was nobody's fault.
They instructed the medias to tell mountains of bullsh*it, so as the people was lost in front of that pile of non-information, everyone did anything.
And after that it was, and still is, sooo easy to put the blame on people.
 

FBnil

my lonely NES is skilling me
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,346
Location
Yurp
Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t some of those fellow forum members advocating against lockdowns, mask mandates and social distancing...?
Opinions change. We could also be fooling the algorithms that read these forums to create profiles of people. There have been authoritarian troll comments, there have been tongue-in-cheeck comments, documented and undocumented statements, there have been midnight splurts and whose essays (yeah, that's you ;) ). Does it matter much? We're in the same boat, and the waterfall is near, if you look forward.

At least this thread is not boring, right? Buy non-perishables, famine is coming.
 

Phlyra

Electric
Joined
Jul 25, 2019
Messages
1,180
It’s certainly not in doubt that certain Western governments are actually only “seeming” to do anything, not taking it sufficiently seriously as many Eastern countries that had to deal with SARS, MERS etc. because they’re too hung up on short term economic losses...
But that doesn’t mean that those three measures I mentioned don’t help reduce deaths. Others here have argued (with scant evidence) that all three measures were causing more deaths than implementing them correctly and should be abandoned - just like Johnson’s done for England.

Yeah, occasionally I’ll produce an essay ;)

It’s ironic, before Covid-19 preppers (in particular Doomsday Preppers) were looked upon as a bit nuts and to be fair there surely are some nutters just as in any group in society but now? Not so much.
 

FBnil

my lonely NES is skilling me
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,346
Location
Yurp
Move *, stay out of my way, stay out of my way...


State property, you got a serial number? Then you are state property....
 

JDTAY

Half Pepperoni, All Cheese
Joined
Sep 15, 2015
Messages
2,423
Age
34
Location
North Carolina, USA
Gotta love this headline.


I accept their premise that some scientific research is flawed. How am I supposed to know which is which though? Almost all COVID-19 research is put out by people I’ve never heard of, both the good and the flawed stuff.
 

ElPoco

Advanced Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
1,021
Age
37
Location
Paris, France
I accept their premise that some scientific research is flawed. How am I supposed to know which is which though? Almost all COVID-19 research is put out by people I’ve never heard of, both the good and the flawed stuff.
I generally look for comments from other scientists in the field (and preferably scientists who still spend their time working rather than being invited to TV shows and selling their books). Not just for medical research, but also for cryptography, sociology or physics.
They might be biased, but they still know more about the topic than I do. And good scientists will give proper arguments like highlighting a weakness in the protocol, countering or supporting some aspects with other studies, etc.
 

matzesu

Forum Addict!
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
11,571
Age
37
Location
Germany,, Saarland, at home
I know its maybe a bit late, but i made this mourning an Apointment for the first Vacination which is tomorrow afternoon in a German Army Kaserne,
It was quite strate vorward, just a few clicks, ..
Its Moderna so i have to go again end of August, but i think it also ok..
 
  • Like
Reactions: rSl

matzesu

Forum Addict!
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
11,571
Age
37
Location
Germany,, Saarland, at home
At least the Google User Rewiews of the Vacination Center (German Army Station), are quite positiv, the German Soldiers are quite Kind, at least as long as you arent and enemy but just a normal Citicen who wants to get vacinatet ^^
 
  • Haha
Reactions: rSl

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
14,747
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
why does chromium truncate the full url when you are browsing... i don't know which thread i'm in. stupid google.
That info's in the page title, which for me at least is copied to the window title. That disappears once I click to reply quoting to be replaced by just 'reply to thread' but the thread in question is still shown below the menu bar as 'The Pyra > Forums > Off topic > Offtopic Discussions > COVID-19 / Coronavirus Pandemic'
 

netcat

Very Active Member
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
502
Location
city of thieves
"Prof Robert West says rhetoric about caution is ‘a way of putting blame on public".
Exactly what some of us said here in March 2020 when we witnessed that western governments were letting people die like dogs.
and to turn people against one another by blaming the "irresponsible minority"
 

matzesu

Forum Addict!
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
11,571
Age
37
Location
Germany,, Saarland, at home
Ok this was easy; im back now and the German Soldiers who run the vaccination center where quite Kind and friendly, I was there 40 minutes bevor the date and right after I fill the paperwork, they lend me in the cabinet, and put the syringe ^^
It ditnt hurt , and after 15 Minutes to see if I get a reaction, whe were on the way home..
 

TeDaDeS

Advanced Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
1,232
Location
The Netherlands
Website
Visit site
Some news on prices of Pfizer vaccine (15.50 euro per vaccine):
Prices appear to differ on when the order is placed, which is somewhat expected I guess when doing business.

Albania apparently leaked the contract with Pfizer (stuff on internet can be faked obviously):
It's included to keep the content of the contract a secret for 10 years. Which could be a bit dubious I guess for a government to do, you would like transparency of your governments actions (including spend tax).
This report also suggest any cost due to legal actions in purchasers country against Pfizer should be covered by the country itself.
 

FBnil

my lonely NES is skilling me
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,346
Location
Yurp
I accept their premise that some scientific research is flawed. How am I supposed to know which is which though? Almost all COVID-19 research is put out by people I’ve never heard of, both the good and the flawed stuff.
There's a crisis in the quality of the papers and it has been like that for a while now.

On top of that, there's this "who pays you, wants xxx results". So if, say a hamburger brand pays for a study, it could result in a study that says that eating there gives you enough vitamins (because they also sell salads) and healthy (they sell water).
 

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
14,747
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
Yes, the reproducability scandal in general was the science scandal just before the pandemic hit. You might hope it being revealed and then the covid crisis hitting might stop them playing this game, but it seems not.
 
Top