Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

chrisd said:
Not me, I like to read a balance of posting and i can usually be pretty certain that his postings are the bottom of the baseline and appear to be so just to wind us all up ?
Click to expand...

Balanced and getting a variety of different views and opinions, absolutely. But this would be the equivalent of incorporate what's coming out of your backside as one of your five a day.
 
Positives of vaccination need to be tempered with the current infection and death rates so people don't get complacent. Still a long way to go and much hurt. Latest data not good for UK. Stay safe.
20210118_172158.jpg
 
HomerJSimpson said:
Hard to be positive when you look at the ICU system and see every bed bar 1 in the Covid areas taken. No relaxation over the weekend and staff continuing to give up days off to help cover shifts
Click to expand...

Just think, this is still the follow up from those that made poor decisions over the festive period. Providing everything goes as it should, things should never be this bad again.

You guys got this.
 
Swinglowandslow said:
I've had enough of this hatred. You are beyond the pale.
It has been explained by those who know the science , on here it's Ethan, that the first dose gives a high degree of immunity( after X days). Not full, but high enough to protect.
The country is in crisis and it's important to get as many people protected as fast as possible.
If you can't see that 200 single doses protects 200 people , whereas the same 200 doses, two each person, protects 100, then you are being highly , nastily , political. I say that because I do not believe that you are as thick as otherwise someone might think.
Why not try being fair minded for once.
Click to expand...
You’ve decided that your guess work over immunity is better than mine. Because even for the scientists, there are a lot of crossed fingers. Also read the things where I give my opinion rather that just relaying what my friends previously said.

The crux of their argument was that the time frame suggests they were knowingly lied to. They accept they’re PROBABLY benefitting from the first jab.

Nothing I’ve said suggests I’m stupid unless you’ve misinterpreted what I’ve said in relation to my friends’ gripe.
 
DanFST said:
Just think, this is still the follow up from those that made poor decisions over the festive period. Providing everything goes as it should, things should never be this bad again.

You guys got this.
Click to expand...

I get that and we all knew Christmas was going to present massive challenges because of the behaviour of the minority. However with the latest mapping our board and our lead consultant we aren't going to see any drop until third week of February and even then it'll be a slow drop off. Not sure how much some, especially the new members of staff and some of the younger ones have left to give
 
Just found out a colleague's wife died from covid last week

How sad. Gutted for him.
 
chrisd said:
Not me, I like to read a balance of posting and i can usually be pretty certain that his postings are the bottom of the baseline and appear to be so just to wind us all up ?
Click to expand...
Go back and read what I said and see the bits where I said I wouldn’t go down the legal route.

I would also take the jab knowing there’d be a twelve week wait.

I would be annoyed if I was assured that my second jab was going to be in three weeks and then almost the moment I’ve had the first one, they email me to tell me it’s actually in twelve weeks. I’d feel lied to.

Why is no one seeing their annoyance was being lied to over something involving medical consent? Both of these people have to follow very strict rules when they consent their own patients so I’m not surprised it annoyed them. Perhaps their own experience in consenting patients made it feel a sacrosanct process to them and that’s why they were so angry at it being messed with.

Also, this happened a couple of weeks ago now. I haven’t spoken about it since. Out of interest I checked out their Facebook pages earlier and I saw one had commented as a follow up to say he feels more comfortable about it now because more information was provided to him regarding availability of the vaccine and the planned programs after the event. The other hasn’t commented.

But it’s nice to see that those who’d accuse me of trying to illicit an angry response have completely ignored the rational side of what I’ve posted, assumed what my personal position is in the situation (mostly inaccurately) and then backslapped each other in their amazing power of deduction. Tiresome but hey, internet folk are gonna internet.

Maybe we can move on now that I’ve clarified everything and the rest comes down to personal opinion. You can think my friends are selfish but ultimately both have been sitting at home furloughed and just wanted to get back to helping patients which they haven’t been able to do. They aren’t selfish people, they were angered by a very specific part of the situation and are still happy to be safer than they were, both to themselves, their families and their patients.
 
Kellfire said:
Go back and read what I said and see the bits where I said I wouldn’t go down the legal route.

I would also take the jab knowing there’d be a twelve week wait.

I would be annoyed if I was assured that my second jab was going to be in three weeks and then almost the moment I’ve had the first one, they email me to tell me it’s actually in twelve weeks. I’d feel lied to.

Why is no one seeing their annoyance was being lied to over something involving medical consent? Both of these people have to follow very strict rules when they consent their own patients so I’m not surprised it annoyed them. Perhaps their own experience in consenting patients made it feel a sacrosanct process to them and that’s why they were so angry at it being messed with.

Also, this happened a couple of weeks ago now. I haven’t spoken about it since. Out of interest I checked out their Facebook pages earlier and I saw one had commented as a follow up to say he feels more comfortable about it now because more information was provided to him regarding availability of the vaccine and the planned programs after the event. The other hasn’t commented.

But it’s nice to see that those who’d accuse me of trying to illicit an angry response have completely ignored the rational side of what I’ve posted, assumed what my personal position is in the situation (mostly inaccurately) and then backslapped each other in their amazing power of deduction. Tiresome but hey, internet folk are gonna internet.

Maybe we can move on now that I’ve clarified everything and the rest comes down to personal opinion. You can think my friends are selfish but ultimately both have been sitting at home furloughed and just wanted to get back to helping patients which they haven’t been able to do. They aren’t selfish people, they were angered by a very specific part of the situation and are still happy to be safer than they were, both to themselves, their families and their patients.
Click to expand...

Sorry Kellfire but your explanation does nothing in my opinion change my view.

The reason for the changes in administering the jab was clearly for the greater good and I see absolutely no justification for your friends anger. There was no lies, things just changed, they are lucky to get the jab. They were furloughed so they were not working, and there was no certainty that receiving the jab would see a return to work for them as far as I can see.

Although I have not read everything posted on this issue I sincerely cannot believe anyone would complain and consider legal action for a change that clearly benefits a majority, I further doubt they would be successful in an action anyway.

No one is "back slapping" but you will detect a lack of agreement with your views on this, a position I, and others are entitled to hold.
 
Kellfire said:
Go back and read what I said and see the bits where I said I wouldn’t go down the legal route.

I would also take the jab knowing there’d be a twelve week wait.

I would be annoyed if I was assured that my second jab was going to be in three weeks and then almost the moment I’ve had the first one, they email me to tell me it’s actually in twelve weeks. I’d feel lied to.

Why is no one seeing their annoyance was being lied to over something involving medical consent? Both of these people have to follow very strict rules when they consent their own patients so I’m not surprised it annoyed them. Perhaps their own experience in consenting patients made it feel a sacrosanct process to them and that’s why they were so angry at it being messed with.
.
Click to expand...

Because it comes across as a massive first world problem/selfish waahmbulance type attitude. And if they're medical professionals, as your post alludes to then its all the worse.
Maybe they could take a leaf out of my 80 year old Aunts book. She had her first jab in December and was all booked for her second. This was then cancelled at short notice. Instead of get angry and entitled about it her attitude was if it means someone else avoids this horrible disease then she's happy to wait.
 
SaintHacker said:
Because it comes across as a massive first world problem/selfish waahmbulance type attitude. And if they're medical professionals, as your post alludes to then its all the worse.
Maybe they could take a leaf out of my 80 year old Aunts book. She had her first jab in December and was all booked for her second. This was then cancelled at short notice. Instead of get angry and entitled about it her attitude was if it means someone else avoids this horrible disease then she's happy to wait.
Click to expand...
As I keep saying - their main anger stemmed from being lied to, not necessarily the medical reasoning behind it although at the time it was very much seen as a political decision by sizeable amount of people.
 
Kellfire said:
As I keep saying - their main anger stemmed from being lied to, not necessarily the medical reasoning behind it although at the time it was very much seen as a political decision by sizeable amount of people.
Click to expand...
But they weren't lied to, after their first jab the policy changed. When they had their initial schedule it was for a quick second follow up but in between the policy changed. That's not telling lies.
 
Kellfire said:
You’ve decided that your guess work over immunity is better than mine. Because even for the scientists, there are a lot of crossed fingers. Also read the things where I give my opinion rather that just relaying what my friends previously said.

The crux of their argument was that the time frame suggests they were knowingly lied to. They accept they’re PROBABLY benefitting from the first jab.

Nothing I’ve said suggests I’m stupid unless you’ve misinterpreted what I’ve said in relation to my friends’ gripe.
Click to expand...

As it happens, I had not read your earlier posts about your friends and their proposed legal challenges etc.
I read only the post of yours that I replied to. Why don't you read it, and then you'll see that it is what I said it is. A hate filled political comment .
And I didn't say you were stupid. You are not . But you are readily nasty at the authorities. I suspect just because they are that. - the ones at present in charge.
You suggested the vaccine policy was not done to save more lives , but for political reasons. Read your last sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top