Covid 19 Part XXXII-215,743 ROI (4,137 deaths)111,166 NI (2,036 deaths)(22/02)Read OP

seamus

is_that_so wrote: »

Do you see companies willing to test a requirement like this for something that is voluntary? It doesn't really come under skills to do your job. There seems to a lot of ruminating on extreme approaches based onw where we currently find ourselves, some of it does not look rational.

I see healthcare contexts going quite strongly on this, as well as companies who routinely send staff on trips to offices in other countries.

I also think quite a few will do it because they'll exploit any ignorance in the area. The vast majority of people will just do it because they want an easy life, they don't want to end up arguing employment law and civil rights with HR. Because that's a sure fire way to kill your career stone dead.

The visions that were being mooted last May where companies had tiny offices and 90% remote workforces, are now proving to be a bit extreme. We know now that a majority of people want to be able to come into the office at least some of the time. Something like 30-40% seem to be willing to do full-time remote working.

So companies can make it nice and simple; if you want to come into the office, even for one day a month, you need to be vaccinated. You can keep working for us, but no vaccine, no office.

I expect the whole discussion will be largely academic anyway. Voluntary uptake will be high; 80-90%+; even without employers making any demands. The dregs then who refuse to vaccinate out of a personal objection will be easy to manage out because they will no doubt be disruptive or underperforming in another area.

AdamD

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think this is over by a long shot yet.

We still do not really know about the long term effects of a rushed vaccine.

We do not know the outcomes of long term covid for those already infected.

TheVirus has already shown it is capable of mutating to a deadlier strain, who knows if it will mutate to a strain that the vaccines cant solve?

You talk about those who put unrealistic hopes into the vaccine time frames, I think a lot of people are putting unrealistic hopes into a vaccine we really do not know much about, or how good it really is.

We do though, from the initial studies and from Israel. Stop with this negative crap. Its far more logical to have faith in our vaccines that to assume anything you've written above.

We have actual evidence the vaccine works. We have no evidence of what you've said.

AdamD

seamus wrote: »

I see healthcare contexts going quite strongly on this, as well as companies who routinely send staff on trips to offices in other countries.

I also think quite a few will do it because they'll exploit any ignorance in the area. The vast majority of people will just do it because they want an easy life, they don't want to end up arguing employment law and civil rights with HR. Because that's a sure fire way to kill your career stone dead.

The visions that were being mooted last May where companies had tiny offices and 90% remote workforces, are now proving to be a bit extreme. We know now that a majority of people want to be able to come into the office at least some of the time. Something like 30-40% seem to be willing to do full-time remote working.

So companies can make it nice and simple; if you want to come into the office, even for one day a month, you need to be vaccinated. You can keep working for us, but no vaccine, no office.

I expect the whole discussion will be largely academic anyway. Voluntary uptake will be high; 80-90%+; even without employers making any demands. The dregs then who refuse to vaccinate out of a personal objection will be easy to manage out because they will no doubt be disruptive or underperforming in another area.

I work for a MNC who have already announced that they will not require any employees to be vaccinated to go to the office, unless local authorities mandate it. Doing so would be a legal minefield.

Gruffalux

seamus wrote: »

So companies can make it nice and simple; if you want to come into the office, even for one day a month, you need to be vaccinated. You can keep working for us, but no vaccine, no office.

On what grounds if it does not affect transmission?

seamus wrote: »

I expect the whole discussion will be largely academic anyway. Voluntary uptake will be high; 80-90%+; even without employers making any demands. The dregs then who refuse to vaccinate out of a personal objection will be easy to manage out because they will no doubt be disruptive or underperforming in another area.

This is extraordinarily condescending. There are people who are very high performing, co-operative, constructive and intelligent who will be inclined to observe for some time before vaccination. They are entitled to do so.

DraftDodger

Mimon wrote: »

Yes but the statistics gathered about millions of people trumps your anecdote with a sample size of 24 people methinks

If people refusing it are working in a care home I hope to hell that they will not be allowed to work there if not vaccinated.

They are still allowed to work and the union has backed them. Look my view on it is they are complete idiots and are putting everyone at risk but then again they can't be forced.

Faceboooook, social media and the internet in general have a lot to answer for.

wadacrack

wadacrack wrote: »

Probably better to respect people opinions on it. If their young and don't want to take the vaccine that's understandable considering its never really been used outside of clinical trials. No Vaccine is good for your body. Personally I will take it , but I won't be putting up selfies and delighted etc.

It’s their choice. But it should be a condition of their job, given what they do.

IMO those who won’t take the vaccine should not be able to assume that they can participate in all aspects of society. They can still make their own choice, but it should not be without repercussions, whether that is limitations on travel or exclusion from certain jobs

Gruffalux

DraftDodger wrote: »

They are still allowed to work and the union has backed them. Look my view on it is they are complete idiots and are putting everyone at risk but then again they can't be forced.

Faceboooook, social media and the internet in general have a lot to answer for.

How are they putting people who have been vaccinated at risk? It appears from the info we have until now that transmission can occur after vaccination just as it can without vaccination. Maybe I am missing some piece of information.

Gael23

Hospital numbers down 60 this morning

AdamD

AdamD wrote: »

We do though, from the initial studies and from Israel. Stop with this negative crap. Its far more logical to have faith in our vaccines that to assume anything you've written above.

We have actual evidence the vaccine works. We have no evidence of what you've said.

Israel is conducting one of the strictest lockdowns in the world. Of course, their infection rates are dropping, this has nothing to do with vaccines. Our rates are dropping, it has zero to do with vaccinations.

polesheep

seamus wrote: »

I see healthcare contexts going quite strongly on this, as well as companies who routinely send staff on trips to offices in other countries.

I also think quite a few will do it because they'll exploit any ignorance in the area. The vast majority of people will just do it because they want an easy life, they don't want to end up arguing employment law and civil rights with HR. Because that's a sure fire way to kill your career stone dead.

The visions that were being mooted last May where companies had tiny offices and 90% remote workforces, are now proving to be a bit extreme. We know now that a majority of people want to be able to come into the office at least some of the time. Something like 30-40% seem to be willing to do full-time remote working.

So companies can make it nice and simple; if you want to come into the office, even for one day a month, you need to be vaccinated. You can keep working for us, but no vaccine, no office.

I expect the whole discussion will be largely academic anyway. Voluntary uptake will be high; 80-90%+; even without employers making any demands. The dregs then who refuse to vaccinate out of a personal objection will be easy to manage out because they will no doubt be disruptive or underperforming in another area.

Nice attitude. I hope it's not shared by too many or this whole thing could become unnecessarily divisive.

polesheep

thelad95 wrote: »

Yes, I do unfortunately agree.

If the vaccines only give short term Immunity, then there will need to be buy in for a good few years for people to get the vaccine periodically and this could wane pretty quickly especially amongst the "healthy" population.

The real scary thing is that there is no precedent for a vaccine being rolled out this quickly. Simply put, nobody knows how this will work out on a global scale.

It's a very romantic idea to imagine everyone vaccinated in September and packed Harcourt Street/Temple Bar but that won't be allowed for quite a while, potentially the other side of Christmas 2021.

It's an uncomfortable truth that in many ways, we're all subject to what is essentially a massive experiment and we will be used as historical precedent if anything ever happens like this again.

There is also a notable shift in policy on a European and indeed global basis that the correct thing to do is to actually close borders for all but the most essential entrants (even they will have to stay in a hotel for two weeks).

Too much lip service was paid to people's perceived god-given freedom of movement meaning people still thinking they can selfishly fùck off to Spain putting there population and ours at further risk. What people don't realise is that that freedom of movement has come about as a result of centuries of political, scientific and cultural advances and that it is actually right and proper to temporarily accept that you don't have that right for a short period of time and allow the equilibrium to return again. It's well and truly evident at this stage that people can't be trusted to do that themselves and as such mandatory hotel quarantine needs to become the new gold standard.

One could easily argue the opposite.

Funsterdelux

I'm going to be a conscientious uninjector....

Probably until 2022

Turtwig

seamus wrote: »

I see healthcare contexts going quite strongly on this, as well as companies who routinely send staff on trips to offices in other countries.

I also think quite a few will do it because they'll exploit any ignorance in the area. The vast majority of people will just do it because they want an easy life, they don't want to end up arguing employment law and civil rights with HR. Because that's a sure fire way to kill your career stone dead.

The visions that were being mooted last May where companies had tiny offices and 90% remote workforces, are now proving to be a bit extreme. We know now that a majority of people want to be able to come into the office at least some of the time. Something like 30-40% seem to be willing to do full-time remote working.

So companies can make it nice and simple; if you want to come into the office, even for one day a month, you need to be vaccinated. You can keep working for us, but no vaccine, no office.

I expect the whole discussion will be largely academic anyway. Voluntary uptake will be high; 80-90%+; even without employers making any demands. The dregs then who refuse to vaccinate out of a personal objection will be easy to manage out because they will no doubt be disruptive or underperforming in another area.

Agree with everything bar that last paragraph. That seems overly harsh and presumptive.

OwenM

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think this is over by a long shot yet.

We still do not really know about the long term effects of a rushed vaccine.

We do not know the outcomes of long term covid for those already infected.

TheVirus has already shown it is capable of mutating to a deadlier strain, who knows if it will mutate to a strain that the vaccines cant solve?

You talk about those who put unrealistic hopes into the vaccine time frames, I think a lot of people are putting unrealistic hopes into a vaccine we really do not know much about, or how good it really is.

When you choose to capitalise The Virus like that it makes me wonder about your mental state, Stockholm syndrome of sorts maybe

10000maniacs

polesheep wrote: »

Nice attitude. I hope it's not shared by too many or this whole thing could become unnecessarily divisive.

The problem is people who refuse to vaccinate are putting other peoples lives at risk.
This should not be their call.
Too many choices in the hands of people who put their wellbeing ahead of those around them.
Not only in vaccination, but in other areas too.
People flying out on foreign holidays, Spanish students flying back to the their host families after the Christmas, People having a great old time in pubs and restaurants before Christmas.
This all added up to over 1000 deaths since the new year. Shame on them.

Stateofyou

OwenM wrote: »

When you choose to capitalise The Virus like that it makes me wonder about your mental state, Stockholm syndrome of sorts maybe

It looks like an autocorrect error for one, but for two the rest of the post is a perfectly logical opinion. I'd worry about your own mental state where you take a grammatical error on an Internet forum and project your own armchair psychology on others. Which says more about you than them.

minitrue

thelad95 wrote: »

The real scary thing is that there is no precedent for a vaccine being rolled out this quickly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldemar_Haffkine#Anti-plague_vaccine
No modern precedent perhaps depending on your definition of modern. As far as medical practice is concerned I'm happy to say things have changed utterly since then so it's a modern phenomenon that we are generally unable or unwilling to roll out a novel vaccine rapidly. The annual flu vaccines are harder to categorise hence my use of the word novel, but Haffkine's plague vaccine was extremely novel utilising a previously unused technique.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-55050012

polesheep

10000maniacs wrote: »

The problem is people who refuse to vaccinate are putting other peoples lives at risk.
This should not be their call.
Too many choices in the hands of people who put their wellbeing ahead of those around them.
Not only in vaccination, but in other areas too.
People flying out on foreign holidays, Spanish students flying back to the their host families after the Christmas, People having a great old time in pubs and restaurants before Christmas.
This all added up to over 1000 deaths since the new year. Shame on them.

So you would like to have the right to force vaccinate people? Anything else you would like to add while you're at it?

10000maniacs

polesheep wrote: »

So you would like to have the right to force vaccinate people? Anything else you would like to add while you're at it?

If it's putting other peoples lives at risk not doing it, yes.

Hector Savage

10000maniacs wrote: »

The problem is people who refuse to vaccinate are putting other peoples lives at risk.
This should not be their call.
Too many choices in the hands of people who put their wellbeing ahead of those around them.
Not only in vaccination, but in other areas too.
People flying out on foreign holidays, Spanish students flying back to the their host families after the Christmas, People having a great old time in pubs and restaurants before Christmas.
This all added up to over 1000 deaths since the new year. Shame on them.

Quit it with the emotional blackmail crap.

Do you blame people when ~200 people die in a bad flu year ?

Where is the line where deaths are unacceptable and anyone on the transmission chain is shamed ?

is_that_so

10000maniacs wrote: »

The problem is people who refuse to vaccinate are putting other peoples lives at risk.
This should not be their call.
Too many choices in the hands of people who put their wellbeing ahead of those around them.
Not only in vaccination, but in other areas too.
People flying out on foreign holidays, Spanish students flying back to the their host families after the Christmas, People having a great old time in pubs and restaurants before Christmas.
This all added up to over 1000 deaths since the new year. Shame on them.

That may not necessarily be true. Until we see a country hit 60-70% of vaccinations, i.e. Israel, we just don't know. I'm inclined to say this type of thing is January 2021 planning which may not be the same as June 2021 planning.

10000maniacs

Hector Savage wrote: »

Quit it with the emotional blackmail crap.

Do you blame people when ~200 people die in a bad flu year ?

Where is the line where deaths are unacceptable and anyone on the transmission chain is shamed ?

Here go with the flu is nearly as bad crap.:rolleyes:
Covid-19 is at least 10 times more deadly, and can cause much more serious issues even if you survive.

polesheep

10000maniacs wrote: »

If it's putting other peoples lives at risk not doing it, yes.

So you would force vaccinate people. As I said, anything else you would like to add to the list?

It's ironic how from the start of this pandemic, those who would do anything and everything to their fellow man in order to protect them and theirs, have labelled everyone else as selfish.

polesheep

10000maniacs wrote: »

Here go with the flu is nearly as bad crap.:rolleyes:
Covid-19 is at least 10 times more deadly, and can cause much more serious issues even if you survive.

You need to get a grip.

runawaybishop

Deleted User wrote: »

Israel is conducting one of the strictest lockdowns in the world. Of course, their infection rates are dropping, this has nothing to do with vaccines. Our rates are dropping, it has zero to do with vaccinations.

In addition, the Health Ministry is reportedly opposed to suggestions that some aspects of the lockdown be eased, in particular by reopening parts of the education system and certain commercial activities.

The lockdown, now in its third week, has not produced a significant drop in infection numbers. Thousands of Israelis are being diagnosed with the virus every day and the positive test rate has remained at around nine percent, compared with lows of around just 1% reached in previous lockdowns.

Also

Only 31 out of 163,000 Israelis vaccinated by Maccabi Healthcare Services were diagnosed with COVID-19 in their first 10 days of full-strength protection, its top vaccine statistics analyst, Anat Ekka Zohar, told The Times of Israel on Thursday.
Maccabi found that an equivalent sample of unvaccinated Israelis was 11 times more likely to be diagnosed with the coronavirus, which allowed it to calculate the effectiveness rate.

Of the 31 zero were hospitalised. Why do you think this is not because of their vaccination program? Are you just anti-vax?

Malcomex

Coronavirus

Where politics meets science

They really are a fukking embarrassment to themselves

All of them

Boggerman12

Hearing on the radio about how some health workers are refusing to take the vaccine.simple choice.No Jab,No Job.the country has tied itself to the ground to protect the health services so its now Payback time.I’m 1000% pro vaccines

KrustyUCC

Don't think no jab, no job would work

I do wonder if they sick with COVID afterwards after refusing the vaccine would reduced sick pay be a runner?

It probably wouldn't either

Malcomex

Boggerman12 wrote: »

Hearing on the radio about how some health workers are refusing to take the vaccine.simple choice.No Jab,No Job.the country has tied itself to the ground to protect the health services so its now Payback time.I’m 1000% pro vaccines

What are they going to do for travel , they will end up grounded?

Are they waiting for a better vaccine?

Deeper Blue

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We still do not really know about the long term effects of a rushed vaccine.

This ****e again? :rolleyes: It wasn't rushed, but I think you know that already.