Astronomy Common Knowledge Quiz.......
Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Anti-Vaxxers Hogging Hospital Beds To The Detriment Of Other Patients.
This example is from across the pond but I would be surprised if it isn't happening over here.
https:/
The anti-vaxxers refuse the vaccine, but not the treatment when the inevitable consequences arise - hypocrisy rules OK.
IMHO they should be barred from hospitals.
https:/
The anti-vaxxers refuse the vaccine, but not the treatment when the inevitable consequences arise - hypocrisy rules OK.
IMHO they should be barred from hospitals.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
jno
Stickybottle, I think roy is suggesting that you repeat yourself...lol
It is a pain is it not jno ?
Having to destroy the anti vax fantasies and glaring hypocrisy with hard facts and empirical evidence from independent sources and healthcare professionals and websites
What they fail to see is that whilst they need treatment when they fall ill and look stupid for not taking a vaccine they are denying and diverting treatment from others more deserving who have followed the advice and guidelines to their credit
Do they not feel remorse when they get admitted to hospital ?
As I have said the evidence shows the nhs staff are sick of them
Shame on them for their selfish attitudes
Stickybottle, I think roy is suggesting that you repeat yourself...lol
It is a pain is it not jno ?
Having to destroy the anti vax fantasies and glaring hypocrisy with hard facts and empirical evidence from independent sources and healthcare professionals and websites
What they fail to see is that whilst they need treatment when they fall ill and look stupid for not taking a vaccine they are denying and diverting treatment from others more deserving who have followed the advice and guidelines to their credit
Do they not feel remorse when they get admitted to hospital ?
As I have said the evidence shows the nhs staff are sick of them
Shame on them for their selfish attitudes
royfromaus
The secret consultant empirical evidence gets posted on again.
Where in that article does the bloke from the Guardian ask about the unvaxxed NHS staff?
——-
Paragraph one :
No idea what secret consultant is
Explain please
Paragraph two :
Who mentioned unvaxxed nhs staff ?
You will have to take that up with them !
Clue : the government in England have already decided that by April all front line nhs staff must be vaccinated
Keep up roy ! Lol
The secret consultant empirical evidence gets posted on again.
Where in that article does the bloke from the Guardian ask about the unvaxxed NHS staff?
——-
Paragraph one :
No idea what secret consultant is
Explain please
Paragraph two :
Who mentioned unvaxxed nhs staff ?
You will have to take that up with them !
Clue : the government in England have already decided that by April all front line nhs staff must be vaccinated
Keep up roy ! Lol
I know somebody who has myeloma - he's had all the chemo treatments and was due to start stem cell treatment in early December; this was cancelled due to the pressures on the NHS because of Covid, and as it stands he doesn't have a new date of when it will commence, and the NHS cannot even give him any indication of a date.
Perhaps the NHS are kicking the can down the road because myeloma is incurable and the ultimate event may intervene before they provide the treatment - I don't know, and don't prescribe to conspiracy theories.
I think it a disgrace the way the Covid Health Service are consigning this man to uncertainty on his treatment, and the mental damage this is causing - I spoke to him just before Xmas and mentally he's in a very bad way. They did offer him "talking therapy" (I believe this is what they call counselling now) in February!!!, but you can't talk myeloma away.
It's a bloody disgrace.
Perhaps the NHS are kicking the can down the road because myeloma is incurable and the ultimate event may intervene before they provide the treatment - I don't know, and don't prescribe to conspiracy theories.
I think it a disgrace the way the Covid Health Service are consigning this man to uncertainty on his treatment, and the mental damage this is causing - I spoke to him just before Xmas and mentally he's in a very bad way. They did offer him "talking therapy" (I believe this is what they call counselling now) in February!!!, but you can't talk myeloma away.
It's a bloody disgrace.
Times doing what a few Abers have been doing
un vaccinated on ITU are 90% is a damned lie
gib us the data
and then rather wrecks it by saying "and the figures, are they lacking one dose, or two doses, or two+booster? And their mothers and sisters what were THEIR status?
The Times also tackles the dative-ablative problem (*)is a positive test WITH covid ( added) or FROM covid?
and then mushes it big time by failing to ask Ht failure and a positive covid test - - could the infection have made the ht filaure worse?
but hell these are common on AB as well - I blame lit courses at uni failing to include statistics in the syllabus
(*) what dat den?
un vaccinated on ITU are 90% is a damned lie
gib us the data
and then rather wrecks it by saying "and the figures, are they lacking one dose, or two doses, or two+booster? And their mothers and sisters what were THEIR status?
The Times also tackles the dative-ablative problem (*)is a positive test WITH covid ( added) or FROM covid?
and then mushes it big time by failing to ask Ht failure and a positive covid test - - could the infection have made the ht filaure worse?
but hell these are common on AB as well - I blame lit courses at uni failing to include statistics in the syllabus
(*) what dat den?
royfromaus
This may get removed but what choice have I?
Are you an idiot, sticky?
———
Well I do idiotically have to put up with your drivel
Can you explain what secret consultant empirical evidence means in your post ?
You do know what empirical evidence is ?
For the hard of understanding
Read and digest :
Empirical evidence is essential to a posteriori knowledge or empirical knowledge, knowledge whose justification or falsification depends on experience or experiment.
In short you need true data from a renowned and reliable source to back up any claims you make
You constantly fail to do so in a daily and regular basis
Are you affiliated to gully ?
This may get removed but what choice have I?
Are you an idiot, sticky?
———
Well I do idiotically have to put up with your drivel
Can you explain what secret consultant empirical evidence means in your post ?
You do know what empirical evidence is ?
For the hard of understanding
Read and digest :
Empirical evidence is essential to a posteriori knowledge or empirical knowledge, knowledge whose justification or falsification depends on experience or experiment.
In short you need true data from a renowned and reliable source to back up any claims you make
You constantly fail to do so in a daily and regular basis
Are you affiliated to gully ?
I feel for your friend Deskdiary
Sadly the more unvaccinated people end up in hospital when it could have been avoided the more that patients like your friend will suffer
The unvaccinated are the major cause of staff redeployments and cancellation of other treatments
That is an undisputed fact
Unpalatable for some but true nonetheless
Sadly the more unvaccinated people end up in hospital when it could have been avoided the more that patients like your friend will suffer
The unvaccinated are the major cause of staff redeployments and cancellation of other treatments
That is an undisputed fact
Unpalatable for some but true nonetheless
//...but what's your suggestion....don't treat covid patients or only treat the vaccinated ones?//
Something along those lines. Either that or the government should honestly answer the question that was posed at the start of the pandemic - "Who do we allow to die?" Everybody knows the answer, but nobody will utter it.
I agree that the number of people admitted to hospital with the virus needs to be reduced in order to get other treatments on track. Since 90% or thereabouts of Covid patients in hospital are unvaccinated it seems clear that the easiest way to do that is either to get them vaccinated (not possible) or restrict their treatment. Strangely when they do go down with Covid, the unvaccinated who do not want "an untested medicine (i.e. the vaccine)" to be administered, will very likely be treated with a recently developed anti-viral drug. But of course we don't hear on Twitter and Facebook of tens of thousands of people being slain as a result of taking them.
//Or is it just the number of covid anti-vaxxers that concerns you?//
Yes it is, but not perhaps for the reasons you think. As a result of the pandemic the government of this country has taken unprecedented steps to control the spread of the virus (most of them unsuccessful, but that's another story). Unparalleled measures have been imposed on the population, controlling who they meet, where they can go and what they can do. This has not been done before for any other disease. Initially it may have been justified because the virus was largely an unknown. Now it is not and one of the things that is known almost without question is that vaccination reduces dramatically the chances of a sufferer requiring hospital treatment. Controlling demand on the NHS is the only justification for imposing those measures; three of the four home countries have reverted to them to some degree and England is tinkering at the edges. If the population is to live under constant threat of seeing a reversion to various restrictions on their liberty, when the overwhelming cause of that threat is from unvaccinated people having to require hospitalisation, then the vaccinated 90% or so have a right to question why it is that they face this threat.
So long as the government does not impose, or does not threaten to impose, restrictions on the population's liberty I don't care whether people are vaccinated or not. But if they do, and the cause of that threat is quite clear, then a debate needs to take place about how to go forward. One thing is for sure - just about as many people who want to receive the vaccine have now done so. The remaining rump will not significantly reduce. So as well as living with the virus, the country must also get used to living with 10% of the population unvaccinated. And that should not include threatening restrictions every time the NHS gets a bit busy.
Something along those lines. Either that or the government should honestly answer the question that was posed at the start of the pandemic - "Who do we allow to die?" Everybody knows the answer, but nobody will utter it.
I agree that the number of people admitted to hospital with the virus needs to be reduced in order to get other treatments on track. Since 90% or thereabouts of Covid patients in hospital are unvaccinated it seems clear that the easiest way to do that is either to get them vaccinated (not possible) or restrict their treatment. Strangely when they do go down with Covid, the unvaccinated who do not want "an untested medicine (i.e. the vaccine)" to be administered, will very likely be treated with a recently developed anti-viral drug. But of course we don't hear on Twitter and Facebook of tens of thousands of people being slain as a result of taking them.
//Or is it just the number of covid anti-vaxxers that concerns you?//
Yes it is, but not perhaps for the reasons you think. As a result of the pandemic the government of this country has taken unprecedented steps to control the spread of the virus (most of them unsuccessful, but that's another story). Unparalleled measures have been imposed on the population, controlling who they meet, where they can go and what they can do. This has not been done before for any other disease. Initially it may have been justified because the virus was largely an unknown. Now it is not and one of the things that is known almost without question is that vaccination reduces dramatically the chances of a sufferer requiring hospital treatment. Controlling demand on the NHS is the only justification for imposing those measures; three of the four home countries have reverted to them to some degree and England is tinkering at the edges. If the population is to live under constant threat of seeing a reversion to various restrictions on their liberty, when the overwhelming cause of that threat is from unvaccinated people having to require hospitalisation, then the vaccinated 90% or so have a right to question why it is that they face this threat.
So long as the government does not impose, or does not threaten to impose, restrictions on the population's liberty I don't care whether people are vaccinated or not. But if they do, and the cause of that threat is quite clear, then a debate needs to take place about how to go forward. One thing is for sure - just about as many people who want to receive the vaccine have now done so. The remaining rump will not significantly reduce. So as well as living with the virus, the country must also get used to living with 10% of the population unvaccinated. And that should not include threatening restrictions every time the NHS gets a bit busy.
Here are the actual stats (from the UK Government, not twitface or theBBC).
https:/
Look at page 28. Although you do need to read the footnote as well the raw stats show vaccinated people in most age groups are the ones 'hogging' the beds.
https:/
Look at page 28. Although you do need to read the footnote as well the raw stats show vaccinated people in most age groups are the ones 'hogging' the beds.
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
Body & Soul11 mins ago
Are Labour Preparing To Dump The P M ?
News14 mins ago
Society & Culture16 mins ago
Crosswords17 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.