Scrutable

Why am I only now getting the alert about the story from last April about covid jabs being made compulsory for NHS staff?

I mean, it can't possibly be a story from now referring to next April, I mean, that would make no f.cking sense whatsoever.

the tough new approach will not come into force until next April year, after Sajid Javid ignored warnings that not introducing it could lead to staff being off sick or dying during the winter, the health service’s busiest time of year.

It's amazing. Not as bad as the delay and the JCVI deciding that kids getting Covid is fine to act as a natural booster for adults.

Just like their approach to chickenpox vaccination

NHS England staff should have Covid vaccine before winter

“To me, the logic is crystal clear. Medicine is founded on science, and the science of the Covid vaccine is comprehensively proven. Mandating the use of the best science isn’t controversial: it’s common sense.

“There are some people who say this isn’t the way we do things in Britain.”

Phew, lucky they got rid of that guy.

shpalman wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 08, 2021 9:12 am

NHS England staff should have Covid vaccine before winter

“To me, the logic is crystal clear. Medicine is founded on science, and the science of the Covid vaccine is comprehensively proven. Mandating the use of the best science isn’t controversial: it’s common sense.

“There are some people who say this isn’t the way we do things in Britain.”

Phew, lucky they got rid of that guy.

I think they are worried that the gamble won't pay off. If you have a staffing crisis already you are making it worse if your staff choose to quit instead. It wasn't a terrible idea 6 months ago. Doing it now when the service is under pressure, staff are burnt out and morale is low and staff leaving just as you get to that Dec-Mar peak is likely to cause massive problems. Far bigger than the small % of unvaxxed nhs workers will cause.

Mandatory Covid jabs shouldn’t be controversial – NHS staff have a duty to do no harm by Frances Ryan in the Guardian.

England hospital units may close as staff revolt over jab mandate, says NHS leader

Aren't they all already closed because of all the staff being off sick or something?

U-turn over mandatory Covid jabs for NHS staff in England

Minister ‘opens the window for us to look at it’ despite that you're supposed to be able to look through windows without opening them.

shpalman wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:16 pm

U-turn over mandatory Covid jabs for NHS staff in England

Minister ‘opens the window for us to look at it’ despite that you're supposed to be able to look through windows without opening them.

Which is riskier for patients - 10% of staff not vaccinated or 10% of staff missing?

Surely regular tests for non vaccinated staff would be as safe?

I wouldn't want treatment decisions being made by an antivaxer.

Technicians, cleaners etc is another story.

Trinucleus wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:30 pm

shpalman wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:16 pm

U-turn over mandatory Covid jabs for NHS staff in England

Minister ‘opens the window for us to look at it’ despite that you're supposed to be able to look through windows without opening them.

Which is riskier for patients - 10% of staff not vaccinated or 10% of staff missing?

Surely regular tests for non vaccinated staff would be as safe?

A regular LFT test tells you that you are not infectious to a typical person at the time you took the test. It does not tell you that you won't be infectious in six to twelve hours time, or that you aren't infectious to a person with reduced immune response.

A PCR test takes time, typically 12-24 hours in most large scale testing systems.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:34 pm

I wouldn't want treatment decisions being made by an antivaxer.

Indeed. While we shouldn't be imposing mandatory vaccination, given that the vaccine does not prevent catching and transmitting the disease, why would anyone working in the medical area not know enough to want to voluntarily get vaccinated anyway?

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 7:38 pm

Trinucleus wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:30 pm

shpalman wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:16 pm

U-turn over mandatory Covid jabs for NHS staff in England

Minister ‘opens the window for us to look at it’ despite that you're supposed to be able to look through windows without opening them.

Which is riskier for patients - 10% of staff not vaccinated or 10% of staff missing?

Surely regular tests for non vaccinated staff would be as safe?

A regular LFT test tells you that you are not infectious to a typical person at the time you took the test. It does not tell you that you won't be infectious in six to twelve hours time, or that you aren't infectious to a person with reduced immune response.

A PCR test takes time, typically 12-24 hours in most large scale testing systems.

Does being vaccinated mean you never infect anyone?

Trinucleus wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 01, 2022 10:47 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 7:38 pm

Trinucleus wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 1:30 pm

Which is riskier for patients - 10% of staff not vaccinated or 10% of staff missing?

Surely regular tests for non vaccinated staff would be as safe?

A regular LFT test tells you that you are not infectious to a typical person at the time you took the test. It does not tell you that you won't be infectious in six to twelve hours time, or that you aren't infectious to a person with reduced immune response.

A PCR test takes time, typically 12-24 hours in most large scale testing systems.

Does being vaccinated mean you never infect anyone?

If you have to ask, you probably shouldn't be suggesting things to do with CoVID. It's all a probability question.

Right now, I have to be boostered and do PCR tests regularly for work. In a non-medical setting where I'm not allowed to work in close proximity with others.

For health care workers within the same system, they have to be boostered and do PCR tests three times a week.

Take away the ~80-90% protection from vaccines, and there isn't a testing protocol that can give the same protection.

I have to say that I'm astonished that this is even a question for discussion, and it shows how f.cked the UK has become.

I used to work in an NHS hospital as a porter, and for that job I had to get various vaccines (HepA, B & C, I think, and some others). It just wasn't an issue. You want a job in a health setting, you comply with the health protocols necessary for that job. I also had to wear a mask and overshoes when going into the ICU and had to have a full-body disposable hazmat suit when going into the isolation ward. Everyone did & nobody even thought about bodily autonomy or whinging about coercion or other f.cking [redacted] b.llsh.t.

I just edited the post. TomP, you know what you wrote. Don't do it again.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:34 pm

I wouldn't want treatment decisions being made by an antivaxer.

Technicians, cleaners etc is another story.

A "Job Swap" scheme could solve this!

We just need appropriate compression fittings so plumbers can work on aortas.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:34 pm

I wouldn't want treatment decisions being made by an antivaxer.

Technicians, cleaners etc is another story.

Cleaners will tend to go to every ward in their area, unlike a nurse who will stay on their ward or a doctor who will do the wards in their speciality.
Although the cleaners won't be close to patients, they will spend a reasonable length of time in any room/ward they are cleaning.

tom p wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:42 am

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:34 pm

I wouldn't want treatment decisions being made by an antivaxer.

Technicians, cleaners etc is another story.

Cleaners will tend to go to every ward in their area, unlike a nurse who will stay on their ward or a doctor who will do the wards in their speciality.
Although the cleaners won't be close to patients, they will spend a reasonable length of time in any room/ward they are cleaning.

Yes, I can see the risk from cleaners (and they're more replaceable). I was just thinking about their professional competence.

The NHS sacking antivaxers is like schools sacking illiterate teachers, or the Space Agency sacking flat-Earthers. It's a single question fitness to practice hearing: do you understand numbers, like, at all?

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:02 am

The NHS sacking antivaxers is like schools sacking illiterate teachers, or the Space Agency sacking flat-Earthers. It's a single question fitness to practice hearing: do you understand numbers, like, at all?

Except that the entire teaching system probably only has one or two functionally illiterate people, and the Space Agency only has a couple of flat-earthers. It's like the old joke about if you owe the bank £50,000 you have a problem, but if you owe them £500,000,000 then the bank has a problem.

A political decision has been made here and I don't envy the people who had to make it. On the one hand it is ostensibly anti-science, but there is also the effect on patient care of not having 10% of your already insufficient and Covid-decimated workforce available.

There is also the fact, which the public knows by now, that being vaccinated does not seem to reduce infection and transmission by anything like what we had all hoped. Everyone knows someone who is triple-jabbed who has had Covid and passed it on to their kids or vice versa. So the politicians calculate that people will not object to this as much as they might have done with, say, 95% efficacy against transmission (and perhaps less against severe illness).

People are starting to vote with their feet. The majority feeling has gone from "OMG, I definitely don't want to get this", which ran from March 2020 until the autumn of 2021, to "We're all going to get it, Omicron and boosters mean I probably won't die or get seriously ill, time to get on with life". Personally I'm still a bit more conservative than that (still wearing a mask out of doors, still nervous about indoor dining), but I'm aware that that is no longer the majority position. Certainly I'm aware that I'm not especially concerned about the vaccination status of anyone I interact with.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:02 am

tom p wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:42 am

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:34 pm

I wouldn't want treatment decisions being made by an antivaxer.

Technicians, cleaners etc is another story.

Cleaners will tend to go to every ward in their area, unlike a nurse who will stay on their ward or a doctor who will do the wards in their speciality.
Although the cleaners won't be close to patients, they will spend a reasonable length of time in any room/ward they are cleaning.

Yes, I can see the risk from cleaners (and they're more replaceable). I was just thinking about their professional competence.

The NHS sacking antivaxers is like schools sacking illiterate teachers, or the Space Agency sacking flat-Earthers. It's a single question fitness to practice hearing: do you understand numbers, like, at all?

People not getting vaccinated = antivaxxers is a bit of a leap

https://www.crainsdetroit.com/health-ca ... id-vaccine

Trinucleus wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:13 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:02 am

tom p wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:42 am

Cleaners will tend to go to every ward in their area, unlike a nurse who will stay on their ward or a doctor who will do the wards in their speciality.
Although the cleaners won't be close to patients, they will spend a reasonable length of time in any room/ward they are cleaning.

Yes, I can see the risk from cleaners (and they're more replaceable). I was just thinking about their professional competence.

The NHS sacking antivaxers is like schools sacking illiterate teachers, or the Space Agency sacking flat-Earthers. It's a single question fitness to practice hearing: do you understand numbers, like, at all?

People not getting vaccinated = antivaxxers is a bit of a leap

https://www.crainsdetroit.com/health-ca ... id-vaccine

If they aren't actual antivaxxers then they are (in almost all cases) gullible tw.ts who believe b.llsh.t they read on farcebook rather than actual provable facts

Trinucleus wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:13 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 10:02 am

tom p wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:42 am

Cleaners will tend to go to every ward in their area, unlike a nurse who will stay on their ward or a doctor who will do the wards in their speciality.
Although the cleaners won't be close to patients, they will spend a reasonable length of time in any room/ward they are cleaning.

Yes, I can see the risk from cleaners (and they're more replaceable). I was just thinking about their professional competence.

The NHS sacking antivaxers is like schools sacking illiterate teachers, or the Space Agency sacking flat-Earthers. It's a single question fitness to practice hearing: do you understand numbers, like, at all?

People not getting vaccinated = antivaxxers is a bit of a leap

https://www.crainsdetroit.com/health-ca ... id-vaccine

Well, they're at least temporarily antivaxxers, even if they claim they'd reconsider their decision at a later date. Unless "antivaxxer" has connotations beyond opposition to the vaccine?

Given that these people are tasked with interpreting medical information on behalf of patients, their given reasons don't exactly inspire confidence:

The reasons behind the health care workers’ vaccine hesitancy were varied, with the most common reasons cited being how quickly the vaccine was developed, insufficient safety and effectiveness data, a disbelief that the vaccine would protect them from COVID-19 infection, and concerns about serious side effects.

These aren't normal members of the community. They're trained healthcare professionals. They're the people who are supposed to be helping vaccine hesitant folk make sensible decisions, but they're mistakenly opting for the dangerous virus over the relatively safe and effective vaccine.

That's a problem. As Steamy says, the problem might actually be too big for a quick fix in post-truth societies like the US and UK. But that should be concerning.

Some of them might be trained healthcare professionals. Not all of them are. The definition of healthcare worker covered by the U.K. legislation would cover a lot of people probably not educated beyond GCSE level. It basically includes anyone whose role ever involves them walking into a clinical area.

Arguably lots of them will be replaceable, but if the numbers of unvaxxed NHS staff lots of highly qualified staff that aren’t easily replaceable then it might be a case of just not providing care at all.

It’s a brilliant idea in principle and definitely should be added to the list of required vaccines for new starters but the reality of carrying the idea out now just isn’t workable.