Ex Footy Legs
Well-known member
Absolutely spot on Chris
When will we stop asking people who are asymptomatic or have only mild symptoms to isolate?
- Thread starter Mwelolo
- Start date
theredrooster
Well-known member
There was a Professor on BBC Breakfast news the other morning who was saying the exact opposite of this. That basically we just need to live with this now as it's here to stay and for the vast majority of fully vaccinated people the symptoms are mild. So in his view we should stop mandatory self isolation for those who test positive.
He did backtrack slightly by saying perhaps it's a little too soon to go down this route but he said we aren't far off that point and that it's ultimately where we'll end up.
My other half is vulnerable and this whole decision about what to do in the future is tremendously difficult as it could be seen as effectively trading off different portions of society against one another. By protecting one group we effectively penalise another. It's just a horrible position for those with the authority to make these sort of decisions to be in.
Firstly not all of the quoted figure are front line staff. Only front line staff will be removed from their roles if they refuse to be vaccinated.
'Majority' of North East NHS staff are jabbed, but hundreds still unvaccinated
Most North East hospital staff have had their Covid jabs, but hundreds remain unvaccinated and NHS Trusts are making plans to convince them ahead of next year's deadline.www.chroniclelive.co.uk
Can the North East get rid of 2000 front line staff and not notice "much of a difference"?
Who do you replace them with?
If we take your arguement to its practical conclusion - that number of staff [for example] is equivalent to 40% of North Tees Hospital NHS Foundation Trust.
Which services would you close down?
Breast screening?
Neurology?
Burns unit?
All Outpatients?
Stroke wards?
Pediatrics?
Maxilofacial unit?
Renal?
By having to do that, it effectively means some people will die because services couldnt operate effectively.
Who will make the decision as to who`s life is more valuable than another?
Trusts have already begun speaking to these people, providing education where it is needed and increasing uptake.
As stated in the attached link there have been very minimal issues with community staff going into care homes from November.
I think we will see broadly the same in April. Some front line staff will accept vaccines when they realise that is the only way to continue doing what they enjoy doing. If you want to have direct patient contact you will have to be vaccinated.
There will be a degree of a negative impact on front line staffing in some areas and that is never welcome bit when you consider all of the above it will be a significantly smaller number spread across several large healthcare Trusts across the North East.
The NHS is is used to a fairly large churn of staff and unfortunately has had to get used to stretching services to provide something like adequate cover.
For me this really is something the government has to focus on. We need an NHS which can cope better with pressures to enable us to open up society and get on with things. Workforce is the key factor in this.
Absolutely, there is nothing nice about any of this.
Society will open up and we have to find the best way to protect people the most vulnerable when this happens.
Last edited:
the_holgate_roof
Well-known member
So survival of the fittest then…..
Laughing
Well-known member
Perhaps suggesting leaving the unvaccinated to die deserves what it got,mocking. I am assuming Blf doesn't believe that and neither do you. That doesn't make the statement any less ridiculous.
But you also have other groups who are vulnerable, such as the elderly, the immuno-compromised, those with underlying conditions and those who cannot take vaccines.
For instance, my parents are both in their 90's and as is almost inevitable with people that age, suffer from comorbidities. They are both triple-jabbed but remain vulnerable.
I also have a friend who's been allergic to all vaccines since she was little and so she relies on there being as few people as possible around, who could potentially infect her with diseases she has no immunity to.
So if it's all the same to you, I'd still like to see measures in place that afford at least some level of protection to my parents, my friend and all the others like them.
So if it's all the same to you, I'd still like to see measures in place that afford at least some level of protection to my parents, my friend and all the others like them.
So would I and as already stated the challenge will establishing how best to protect the most vulnerable whilst opening up society and getting on with things.
the_holgate_roof
Well-known member
So compulsory masks (none of this exemption nonsense unless provable) and social distancing then???
Not sure what you're basing that claim on. The vast, vast majority of NHS staff are vaccinated.*
As stated in the article below, as of Sep 9 last year, 92% of NHS workers were already vaccinated and obviously the number can only have gone up since then.
Eight per cent of the NHS’s workforce are unvaccinated
*Edit: Although only based on anecdotal evidence, I'd also be willing to lay odds that the overwhelming majority of unvaccinated NHS workers are non-clinical staff. Certainly, according to my daughter, in her hospital all the front line staff who've actually had the experience of treating Covid patients and seeing how many of the unvaccinated die, (including some otherwise healthy, young individuals) are vaccinated - and more than happy to be so.
Last edited:
JM14
Well-known member
If this was to happen though the most vulnerable wouldn’t even be able to go to work, go shopping or go anywhere that will bring them into contact with others. Having to isolate for a week is an inconvenience for most of us, but scrapping this all together will completely destroy lives
Laughing
Well-known member
Six independent studies released since Christmas all concur that omicron is less deadly than delta because it can't replicate in the lungs very well. Its not new information but independently they all corroborate what the SA health authority have been saying for some time.
What the studies don't show is how less deadly than delta, omicron is.
Would it result in an acceptable level of mortality seems to be the one remaining question.
What the studies don't show is how less deadly than delta, omicron is.
Would it result in an acceptable level of mortality seems to be the one remaining question.
motownjunk
Well-known member
I think the main question is not direct mortality, if say it comes down to the mortality of a typical flu year of say a 100 deaths a week, the main worry is hospitalisation rate. If this is still too high then death rates from covid and other things rocket massively when hospitals get full.
viv_andersons_nana
Well-known member
One thing to keep in mind here; this is working how the government intended it to. We're all fighting and scrapping amongst ourselves while a pandemic spreads through the country for the third or fourth time. If a government was hell-bent on protecting people and saving lives then we wouldn't be in this position. It is apparently accepted now that herd immunity was the government's plan at the start of the pandemic and that's what we're living through. Society has once again splintered off into groups and counter-groups who argue amongst themselves while the government are nowhere to be seen. It is a consistent theme under this Conservative government.
We've gone from all being nice to each other for a year to boiling down an incredibly complex and nuanced set of discussions and decisions to a yes or no, right or wrong, black or white, agree or disagree argument. We've been pitted against each other. It happens way too often for it to be anything other than government policy, backed up by a series of news and newspaper editors who are far too close to the government for comfort. It pollutes the vast majority of discourse and discussion around absolutely everything, from the pandemic to Brexit to racism to the environment to feminism and back again.
"Let the bodies pile high" was and is their mantra. It is disgusting.
That's slightly off topic I suppose but it's a big part of why we are where we are. I don't think it would've been as bad as it is now if we had a competent government in place who took action sooner, listened to and followed scientific advice and invested properly in services and solutions. The pandemic will quite probably last longer in this country than a lot of others simply because our infrastructure has been absolutely decimated by more than a decade of brutal and savage cuts. I don't think we can truly move forward until that is acknowledged, discussed and included as part of our pandemic response and those responsible are removed from office.
We've gone from all being nice to each other for a year to boiling down an incredibly complex and nuanced set of discussions and decisions to a yes or no, right or wrong, black or white, agree or disagree argument. We've been pitted against each other. It happens way too often for it to be anything other than government policy, backed up by a series of news and newspaper editors who are far too close to the government for comfort. It pollutes the vast majority of discourse and discussion around absolutely everything, from the pandemic to Brexit to racism to the environment to feminism and back again.
"Let the bodies pile high" was and is their mantra. It is disgusting.
That's slightly off topic I suppose but it's a big part of why we are where we are. I don't think it would've been as bad as it is now if we had a competent government in place who took action sooner, listened to and followed scientific advice and invested properly in services and solutions. The pandemic will quite probably last longer in this country than a lot of others simply because our infrastructure has been absolutely decimated by more than a decade of brutal and savage cuts. I don't think we can truly move forward until that is acknowledged, discussed and included as part of our pandemic response and those responsible are removed from office.
What will happen is we will stop testing. It won't be a case of knowing you're infected with covid and mixing with people it will be like it is for any other illness where you have symptoms and tell people you have a cold/flu/covid but it is really just guesswork. If your symptoms are bad you have sick leave from work.
Hopefully the new work from home culture will mean anyone feeling mildly ill will just work from home instead of heading into the office. I know I've had plenty of days in the past where I had a pretty heavy cold and still gone in to work, potentially infecting others. I won't have to do that anymore. If I'm capable of working I'll do it from home.
Hopefully the new work from home culture will mean anyone feeling mildly ill will just work from home instead of heading into the office. I know I've had plenty of days in the past where I had a pretty heavy cold and still gone in to work, potentially infecting others. I won't have to do that anymore. If I'm capable of working I'll do it from home.
I agree mostly but there are of course people who can’t work from home.
r00fie1
Well-known member
Points here might make for conversation in the pub, but there is no substance.
Where are the official, reliable, confirmed sources?
There is a shortfall of 60,000 qualified medical practitioners to begin with.
All perfectly valid points, though they may not be what you want to hear.
Which ones would you like to contest?
Laughing
Well-known member
I would assume though that flu has hospitalizations for a similar amount of time. If covid and flu coexist, which isn't necessarily the case, then we need to have a system that can cope with both every winter.
That will, of course, take time but it's probably close to the right solution. Along with yearly vaccinations.
A company in Japan are currently working on a one and done life time vaccination and the animal trials have gone very well. They are currently on macaques extensive trials on mice.
r00fie1
Well-known member
This is not just the NHS but the whole care sector.
Its not just about covid - its about the whole service.
The failure of one service effects all others - both Primary and Secondary Care.
Brexit slashed staffing in the care sector at a stroke.
As a nation, we lost doctors, specialists, Consultants, experienced Senior Medical Practitioners, Qualified Nurses and Care Staff - in both community and Residential settings.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/about-us 
Brexit and the end of the transition period | The King's Fund
On Christmas Eve 2020 a new EU-UK trade and co-operation deal was agreed. Jonathon Holmes looks at what the new deal means for the health and care system.
www.kingsfund.org.uk
Here is an extract from a report published by The Kings Fund. Published January 2021:
Brexit and the end of the transition period: what does it mean for the health and care system?
Workforce and immigration
Immigration: the health and care system’s international workforce
Leaving the EU’s single market means that there will no longer be free movement of labour between the UK and European Economic Area (EEA) countries........[click on link above to read whole report
Implications
The NHS and the social care sector would not be able to function without their international workforce.
In the short term, the current workforce shortfall in the NHS is so severe that it will require at least 5,000 more nurses a year to be recruited from overseas while measures to increase domestic training capacity take effect.
The government recognises that international recruitment is key to increasing NHS staff headcount and has committed to recruiting an additional 12,000 nurses from overseas by 2024/25.
This commitment will require an immigration policy that is supportive of ethical international recruitment if it is to be realised. Ending the free movement of labour from the EEA to the UK has placed a new barrier to recruiting staff from those nations, however, it will not materially change or create new barriers to recruiting staff from non-EEA nations from where a growing number of international staff in health care services are arriving (General Medical Council 2020; Nursing and Midwifery Council 2020).
It is too early to say if the new Health and Care Worker Visa alongside the Immigration Health Surcharge exemption will maintain the UK’s status as an attractive place to come to work for non-British nationals now the transition period has ended. The restrictions of movement necessitated by the Covid-19 pandemic have halted and undermined efforts to increase international recruitment to the NHS.
In the social care sector, the new arrangements will create a greater challenge as care workers are not eligible for a Health and Care Worker Visa.
The advice, given by the Migration Advisory Committee and accepted by government, is that workforce shortages in social care are driven by market forces, such as rates of pay, and would not be resolved by increased international recruitment.
However, with no immediate solution to the market or funding issues in social care, the current arrangements are likely to mean that social care providers will struggle to recruit new overseas staff in 2021, adding to existing staff shortages and compounding the pressure on the social care workforce.
..........................
Anyone interested in the issue of staffing healthcare and providing human resources to service an effective pro-active National Healthcare Serivce in Primary and Secondary Care may find the following links and articles useful:
Disabled people struggling to hire carers after Brexit
Ministers refuse to ease immigration restrictions as campaigners warn of ‘social care time bomb’
www.theguardian.com
The impact of Brexit on the care sector | Predicting care staff shortages | Guardian Carers
The UK care sector relies on EU nationals, but with the UK now out of the EU, how will the sector cope? According to 2019/20 figures, 113,000 jobs were filled by EU nationals which amounts to 7% of the overall 1.54 million jobs.
guardiancarers.co.uk
What Does Brexit Mean to Carers? | Carer's Voice | Independent Living
<p>Laura Graham, who combines being a full-time carer for her mother with working as an independent researcher/writer/consultant in the fields of addiction recovery, mental health and carers’ issues, explains some of the fears affecting carers following the vote to leave the EU. Brexit looms and...
www.independentliving.co.uk
'So it begins': Care worker living in UK for 44 years loses job due to Brexit rules
A CARE worker who came to the UK when she was an 11-month-old baby has lost her job as a consequence of Brexit rule changes.
www.thenational.scot