Covid - news and views
Comments
-
It's the patients / care home residents who are being put at risk by the very people who are caring for them. I'd like to understand the non-vaxers reasoning.
2 -
I would hate to think that people knowing or believing that many in the BAME community are not having the vaccine would create a "them and us" society. It could set back the great strides that have been made in achieving better race relationships. I sincerely hope not but fear it is possible especially if there was a major outbreak again which was centred on any specific community.
1 -
I don't think it matters what nationality the nurses/carers are, JV, as we surely don't want to go down the unpleasant race road. It's the fact that folk who are caring for others are rejecting the vax that is the relevant issue and is both concerning and puzzling.
6 -
It’s up to the scientists/Govt to engage with all communities if there are weak points of vax uptake.
2 -
But you have said in previous posts that you yourself cannot understand why they are not taking the vaccine and that they should or not be allowed to work in such settings?
(was it you? - if not apologies)
1 -
You don’t know that, there are many multi generational families that are all in a bubble & they struggle to trust anything they don’t understand. It can be changed with the will. Neither you nor I have suffered to the extent that they have JV, they need help & assistance not negative vitriol.
6 -
Negative? and what has been advised on news programmes and other media outlets (not the terrible social media vitriol) to try to encourage some areas of the population to increase the takeup, ,even a very major campaign. by very public members of the BAME community
2 -
It's interesting when you look up the history, the smallpox vaccination was made compulsory in 1853 in England and Wales for children in their first three months of life and was discontinued in 1971.
Smallpox killed all ages of the population so a slightly different scenario. But I agree, anyone working with vulnerable people should be vaccinated it should be part of their contract. I think at present there are contractual problems which will need to be overcome, hopefully sooner rather than later.
5 -
The reasons for none take up are hugely varied. Varies from community to community as well. Some are still the very reasons that hold certain communities back in a lot of aspects of their lives, so the breaking down of these barriers are complex and very difficult. It’s not just the BAME communities, but many other cultures, lifestyles, entrenched beliefs.
Difficult, but persuasion needs to happen.
1 -
I agree there are campaigns👍🏻, but they’re not working, a concerted effort is needed to get to the nub of the issue, if some refuse then so be it, I will never ever agree to a forced vaccination programme. Vax by agreement or don’t get vax’d, we do not live in a Police state.
1 -
As a Country we need 85% to get herd immunity-to ensure a normal life, that’ll be good👍🏻👏🏻👏🏻
0 -
On the BBC news this morning Matt Hancock stated the current uptake of the vaccine is 90%, well above the original government expectation of 75%.
Lets hope that level of uptake carries on through all the population, and not just in the UK but globally (eventually).
0 -
I'm all for everyone who can be given the jab taking up the offer. On an individual basis if somebody decides against it they should not be forced and not having it really only puts them at additional risk of serious illness and death, which in turn places added strain on the NHS and other services.
0 -
According to the WHO
The percentage of people who need to be immune in order to achieve herd immunity varies with each disease. For example, herd immunity against measles requires about 95% of a population to be vaccinated. The remaining 5% will be protected by the fact that measles will not spread among those who are vaccinated. For polio, the threshold is about 80%. The proportion of the population that must be vaccinated against COVID-19 to begin inducing herd immunity is not known. This is an important area of research and will likely vary according to the community, the vaccine, the populations prioritized for vaccination, and other factors.
1 -
But this isn't correct.
It puts those people who cannot have the vaccine due to underlying health reasons at risk, plus, at the moment, those awaiting the vaccine, plus those who are like minded and also refuse the vaccine.
As you alluded to it does put more strain on Public Health Services. It also affects the States finances in having to look after them.
4 -
The World can’t even agree on that, I found Harvard immunologists suggesting 80%, the Lancet journal suggesting 85%🤷🏻♂️. I’m no expert but there seems plenty out there are🙄
0 -
The more people who take up the vaccine then the quicker the virus will hopefully die out. If herd immunity isn't reached then these people will be responsible for keeping it going.
I do understand that even if I have the vaccine that I can still transmit the virus to someone else. My point is more the fact that if herd immunity isn't reached the possibility of the virus remaining active increases.
3 -
As you say plenty are suggesting various figures from about 70% upwards. As somebody said up thread "Follow the science not the idiots"
In this case the ever cautious WHO has said "The proportion of the population that must be vaccinated against COVID-19 to begin inducing herd immunity is not known".
Of course research is on going and we now need to wait rather than mislead.
1 -
Flu is a corona virus which spreads, mutates, and kills thousands every year despite millions being vaccinated against it and herd immunity has never been reached. We live with it.
SARS-CoV-2 will most likely be with the same as Flu; it will remain active and we will have to live with. The current vaccines will for the most part prevent people getting seriously ill, although that is not guaranteed. They do not guarantee that you will not catch the virus, nor do they guarantee that you will not spread it if you do get infected. noticeably or asymptomatically.
Bearing in mind that the primary objective of the virus is to replicate, the later mutations seem to be residing more heavily in the upper respiratory tract of those infected making it much easier for the virus to be spread by aerosol (coughs and sneezes spread diseases).
One thing we have yet to see is the SARS-CoV-2 virus becoming less dangerous. It can't replicate if it kills its hosts so it may yet become more able to easily spread but less of a killer. Sneaky!
0 -
Established facts have little to do with individual decisions. Look at the deliberations in the US Senate as an example. Irrational decisions fly in the face of evidence.
The real worry is that the more cases around = a far greater capability to mutate. Remember the infinite number of chimps with typewriters producing Shakespeare argument.
1
