Covid Vaccine Poll

[Steve (sdh2903)]

7 hours ago, Blatman said:

But Covid is the biggest risk to healthcare

 

Out of an average 1700 deaths a day in the UK currently we are seeing a 7 day average of 11 people a day dying with covid (not of). So no I don't agree. 

[stephenh]

The latest estimate of people suffering from debilitating "long covid" seems to be in the order of 300 thousand people just in this Country. That is a lot of very sick people and an ongoing cost to both the NHS and the economy generally. At any one instant at the present time the last time I looked, I think there were in the order of 1000 plus people in hospital in this Country with severe Covid. That is a significant cost to the NHS and to the economy generally.

Of course, there are lots of other people ill, some in hospital, due to other illnesses and accidents, but for the most part, with Covid, the solution is so simple and so cheap, and so readily available to all adults. Just get vaccinated. It really is a no brainer, surely?

[AdamR]

What is "long Covid" though?

 

Any time you get any sort of virus it takes months to recover fully. 

[Blatman]

3 hours ago, Steve (sdh2903) said:

 

Out of an average 1700 deaths a day in the UK currently we are seeing a 7 day average of 11 people a day dying with covid (not of). So no I don't agree. 

 

Because we have been compliant with lockdowns. Remember Adams point (which is the current segment of this conversation) was that we didn't need lockdowns or that they had gone on too long for a low risk disease. My point is that if we do nothing, we will see cases rise and the NHS overwhelmed which is no good for anyone who becomes sick, Covid or not. Covid is not a low risk disease. Lockdowns are not a low risk strategy to deal with it. But which would we rather have? Unmitigated spread of a disease we KNOW kills people over and above the norms and is DEFINITELY more deadly than seasonal flu, or lockdowns and life restrictions that mitigate many, but not all risks? Any answer is a tough call and Governments err on the side of saving as many lives as possible whilst recognising that there will always be avoidable deaths. But a few thousand avoidable deaths is much preferable to tens or hundreds of thousands. It's a tough choice and I doubt if any one of us were to swap places with Boris we'd make the decision to open up and to hell with the consequences. 

[Blatman]

28 minutes ago, AdamR said:

What is "long Covid" though?

 

Any time you get any sort of virus it takes months to recover fully. 

 

Colds take a few days. Mumps a week or two. Measles/Rubella much the same. Same for flu, glandular fever (mono-nucleosis or EBV), viral tonsilitis... I could go on and apart from measles and flu, I have had all of them and recovered quickly as has EVERYONE I know. So no, ANY type of virus taking months to recover from is very wide of the mark.

Long Covid, as I understand it, is where symptoms (shortness of breath loss of taste or smell, fatigue etc) are present longer than the expected 10 days or so that it takes the body to fight off the infection and return to homeo-stasis. But the same would be true for any viral infection where symptoms last longer than expected in the normal course of the infection.

[AdamR]

I think we're going have to agree to disagree on this one Blatman, as I have a different personal experience.

[Steve (sdh2903)]

38 minutes ago, Blatman said:

Covid is not a low risk disease

 

As per Adam ill agree to disagree. But for large chunks of the population the above statement is simply false. 

[Blatman]

Discussion without point and counter point is... er... pointless...

 

And I think the segment of the population who were previously largely unaffected may now be seeing more effects with the delta variant. So the risk profile seems to be changing. It may not be a Big risk yet, but we're still at the very start of the history of Covid-19.

It seems to affect younger people more often. In the United Kingdom, studies showed that children and adults under 50 were 2.5 times more likely to become infected.

From here: https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-19-delta-variant-what-to-know

 

Adam, I appreciate that individual cases may vary and if you have taken longer than average to recover from viral infections then that is unpleasant. However I do firmly believe (and the data shows) that long covid is quite rare. There will always be exceptions. That said, your previous assertion that you don't believe there is a risk, yet with an admission that (it seems) the effects of viral infections last longer with you suggest that maybe you should think more carefully about being vaccinated. Although I can't remember right now if you have already said if you've been vaccinated or not...

[Richard (OldStager)]

i picked up a virus back in december 2018, most likely a flu strain, i think i got it from next doors young kids as she looks after them during the day but thats really hard to prove, anyway  the main part of the symptoms disappeared in a few days, all except for a constant cough and excess mucus, this is still with me today, and to many it sounds like long covid, i dont think it is, unless it was around in late 2018, but it hasnt shifted, anti biotics didnt help , so for those who do have it i sympathise greatly.

 

i see both sides of the discussion so far and i fully get why folks hate the restrictions, so do i,  as someone once said, you can please some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time - or words to that effect. same applies here.

[Steve (sdh2903)]

 

13 minutes ago, Blatman said:

Discussion without point and counter point is... er... pointless...

 

There's no real counter discussion to be had though if your unable to see things from both sides? 

 

I was simply stating a fact that for huge numbers of people covid is not high risk. I know more people around my age group that have had covid with zero or minimal symptoms than those who have. 

 

Those who are at high risk have all been offered or had opportunity to be double vaccinated.

 

Either you have faith in your vaccination program or you keep restrictions in place because you don't. We seem to be in a position in this country where we have both. 

[Blatman]

I do see both sides. I'm arguing one side and trying to provide evidence as to where I get information from, information that informs my opinions. With the Covid discussion I am careful to only try and source my information from websites with provenance. These are by far (for me) the most trustworthy sources and often the most under-reported or worse, inaccurately reported by lazy journalists... but I digress...

 

I have already commented on the "unaffected" population question. We cannot guarantee, nor is there any evidence to suggest that this section of the population will remain unaffected forever. Virus' mutate all the time. The more a virus circulates, the more it has an opportunity to mutate. Surely there is a clear and obvious risk to ignoring this potential. Of the thousands of mutations so far we are lucky that only a few have raised concern. If vaccination and restrictions can help to further mitigate the opportunity for the virus to circulate, even a little bit, then we should continue with restrictions and vaccinations for a bit longer, at least until we get the Delta variant a bit more under control. Then we hope that another new variant of concern doesn't rain on our parade.

 

I don't see faith in vaccinations and restrictions as mutually opposing positions. The vaccine, according to the vast majority of data, is very effective but it doesn't completely stop infection or transmission. Restrictions help to further mitigate risk not just for the vaccinated but for the un-vaccinated too and in a democracy sometimes we have to endure things in recognition of the greater good. If the restrictions can help to reduce Covid levels to a place where we can live with it (I agree it ain't going anywhere soon) and give the NHS the opportunity to get the waiting lists back under control then I'm all for them. Removing restrictions that, to my way of thinking would lead to a greater backlog would be a questionable decision.

[Richard (OldStager)]

6 minutes ago, Blatman said:

I do see both sides. I'm arguing one side and trying to provide evidence as to where I get information from, information that informs my opinions. With the Covid discussion I am careful to only try and source my information from websites with provenance. These are by far (for me) the most trustworthy sources and often the most under-reported or worse, inaccurately reported by lazy journalists... but I digress...

 

I have already commented on the "unaffected" population question. We cannot guarantee, nor is there any evidence to suggest that this section of the population will remain unaffected forever. Virus' mutate all the time. The more a virus circulates, the more it has an opportunity to mutate. Surely there is a clear and obvious risk to ignoring this potential. Of the thousands of mutations so far we are lucky that only a few have raised concern. If vaccination and restrictions can help to further mitigate the opportunity for the virus to circulate, even a little bit, then we should continue with restrictions and vaccinations for a bit longer, at least until we get the Delta variant a bit more under control. Then we hope that another new variant of concern doesn't rain on our parade.

 

I don't see faith in vaccinations and restrictions as mutually opposing positions. The vaccine, according to the vast majority of data, is very effective but it doesn't completely stop infection or transmission. Restrictions help to further mitigate risk not just for the vaccinated but for the un-vaccinated too and in a democracy sometimes we have to endure things in recognition of the greater good. If the restrictions can help to reduce Covid levels to a place where we can live with it (I agree it ain't going anywhere soon) and give the NHS the opportunity to get the waiting lists back under control then I'm all for them. Removing restrictions that, to my way of thinking would lead to a greater backlog would be a questionable decision.

what he said 🔼

 

surely, for what, 4 extra weeks this has to be worth it even if its just to stop a and e filling up or worse beds, leaving those clear for folks with other emergencies. for me a no brainer.

[Steve (sdh2903)]

1 minute ago, OldStager said:

surely, for what, 4 extra weeks

 

If I thought for just one minute that was the case then I'd agree. But when the date comes in July it will simply be a different set of restrictions and rules. I would stake a significant wager on it. Even yesterday I heard boris saying that we are moving irreversibly towards unlocking. And then 30 seconds later he said there may be more restrictions in the winter . I think Boris needs to understand the word irreversible. 

 

OK @BlatmanI understand your view, but answer me this, how do we move forward when other mutations appear? More lockdowns whilst we "understand" them?

 

The delta variant has been in circulation for near 3 months with tens of thousands of cases to study and the line is still we're still understanding the impact. 

 

So would you be in favour of further lockdowns of several months each to understand each mutation? 

[Richard (OldStager)]

1 hour ago, Steve (sdh2903) said:

 

If I thought for just one minute that was the case then I'd agree. But when the date comes in July it will simply be a different set of restrictions and rules. I would stake a significant wager on it. Even yesterday I heard boris saying that we are moving irreversibly towards unlocking. And then 30 seconds later he said there may be more restrictions in the winter . I think Boris needs to understand the word irreversible. 

 

OK @BlatmanI understand your view, but answer me this, how do we move forward when other mutations appear? More lockdowns whilst we "understand" them?

 

The delta variant has been in circulation for near 3 months with tens of thousands of cases to study and the line is still we're still understanding the impact. 

 

So would you be in favour of further lockdowns of several months each to understand each mutation? 

it may well be, thats what you get when we have no control over how and when it mutates. there are no correct answers here, just best guess predictions on what its likely to look like come july and and if new voc's are found or the nhs gets overloaded expect the same again.

as someone with less than adequate mental health, the whole thing is and has reversed my what was a good recovery, i wish this was all over - now... and the only control on the virus we have is restrictions where deemed sensible, i currently deem them sensible.

[Richard (OldStager)]

its just occured to me steve, as your in scotland, are your restrictions currently tighter than englands, i havent seen one of nicola's daily talks for months now...