| NHS mandatory vaccines 22:19 - Nov 9 with 5096 views | LeoMuff |
Reports saying 110000 nhs staff are unvaccinated and many would rather leave than be forced to have it, anyone see a u turn on the horizon ?
NHS staffing is already in the direst of dire straits
|  |
| |  |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 13:58 - Nov 10 with 1468 views | Crawfordsboot |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 13:32 - Nov 10 by Pinewoodblue |
There are a statistically small number who are unable to be vaccinated, or had the first jab and due to adverse reaction are not being given the second jab. I know people in the latter category.
Care workers first deadline is this week, with an extension until late December for those who claim to be medically exempt to get their GP to support the in writing.
I am aware of care home workers leaving this week and being welcome, with open arms, by NHS.
Presumably it will also be mandatory for NHS workers to also be vaccinated against influenza. Are there not already a mandatory requirement to have other vaccines. |
If the numbers who are unable to be vaccinated are statistically small then the impact of them not being able to work in care homes will also be statistically small. It will be unfortunate that these people can not continue as care workers but for the elderly vulnerable individuals in their care the spread of the virus in a home would be a tragedy.
My understanding is that the majority of the unvaccinated workers are unvaccinated by choice not because of medical limitations. This would appear to be borne out by the percentages of unvaccinated staff varying greatly across different ethnic groups.
I’m not sure what your point is re the NHS. I presume that similar rules for employees in patient facing roles will apply. |  | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 14:18 - Nov 10 with 1433 views | ITFC_1988 |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 13:28 - Nov 10 by Digger77 |
I don't work for the NHS. This is literally what a nurse said on the radio this morning.
You should refocus your campaign to NHS workers. Not sure you're reaching many nurses here on a football forum!
If you can show evidence of no long-term affects on their fertility, that would be helpful? Please show the data. [Post edited 10 Nov 2021 13:44]
|
That's not how burden of proof works.
You made the claim, you provide the evidence.
I could tell you that I could fly - the onus would be on me to prove that I can, not on you to prove that I can't. |  | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 14:22 - Nov 10 with 1415 views | ElderGrizzly |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 14:18 - Nov 10 by ITFC_1988 |
That's not how burden of proof works.
You made the claim, you provide the evidence.
I could tell you that I could fly - the onus would be on me to prove that I can, not on you to prove that I can't. |
Absolutely. This is a great article on how to respond/interact with conspiracy theorists.
I particularly liked the Invisible Dragon story in the link below:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/29/how-to-deal-with-a-conspiracy-th
1. Hunting an invisible dragon
In a memorable thought experiment, the astrophysicist and writer Carl Sagan described taking a visitor to see a fire-breathing dragon in his garage. Upon entering, the visitor was surprised to find an empty space — but Sagan replied that he had simply forgotten to mention that the dragon was invisible. The visitor then decides to throw a bag of flour on the floor to trace its outline — only to find out that it will be of no use because the dragon hovers off the ground. When the visitor suggests using an infrared camera, he is told that the dragon’s flames are heatless. There is no way, in other words, to either prove or falsify its existence.
This kind of argument is known as special pleading; you essentially move the goal posts whenever someone asks for evidence to prove your point — a tactic that is commonly used in many conspiracy theories. [Post edited 10 Nov 2021 14:25]
|  | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 14:24 - Nov 10 with 1409 views | ElderGrizzly |
Most aren't claiming that though. They are just simply anti-vaxx. | | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 15:14 - Nov 10 with 1378 views | Digger77 |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 13:56 - Nov 10 by DanTheMan |
"If you can show evidence of no long-term affects on their fertility, that would be helpful? Please show the data."
That's not how it works. In the same vein, there's no study showing your head doesn't explode 5 years after having the vaccine because:
A) There's no reason to think that could happen.
B) How can there be a long term study when it's not been out a long time?
A more pertinent question would be how would the virus effect a person's fertility? If you could prove there is a way that could happen, that would be interesting. |
I think her issue was with B). | | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 15:16 - Nov 10 with 1368 views | Digger77 |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 14:18 - Nov 10 by ITFC_1988 |
That's not how burden of proof works.
You made the claim, you provide the evidence.
I could tell you that I could fly - the onus would be on me to prove that I can, not on you to prove that I can't. |
There is no evidence either way. That's kind of the issue. | | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 16:21 - Nov 10 with 1312 views | braveblue |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 22:29 - Nov 9 by blueconscience |
Serious Pandemic eh?
I know, let’s sack over 100,000 medical/care staff!!!
What is this world coming to? [Post edited 9 Nov 2021 22:44]
|
So you believe over 100,000 will walk away on 1 April? Why not look at what happened in care homes. 82,000 not vaccinated and last weekend it was 32,000. Medical staff will lose all support if they think vulnerable people want to be in hospital with non vaccinated staff looking after them. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 16:44 - Nov 10 with 1291 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Its probably a gross exagerration - and nobody is saying who these staff are or where they work. Probably a load of bench teamers on zero hours contracts who fillin as and when.
They will no doubt be sacked in the spring - and then taken on as agency staff at a higher rate. That way they are not NHS - and the government can pretend to have 'won'
MInd you - there is little evidence that unvaccinated or vaccinated staff are any more dangerous to vulnerable vaccinated patients. - posturing PMs not wearing a mask are probably more of a danger in hospitals | |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 17:00 - Nov 10 with 1259 views | TractorWood |
It's important to remember the NHS is one of the top 5/6 employers in the world with c.1.7m employees. 100k unvaccinated actually means 94% vaccinated. Hopefully this will get as close to 100% as possible but fundamentally sounds safe enough.
As a few have mentioned it's probably now just people who think Bill Gates is controlling pizza gate through Sasquatch's TikTok account. |  |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 17:27 - Nov 10 with 1230 views | Mullet |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 15:14 - Nov 10 by Digger77 |
I think her issue was with B). |
You misspelled me there |  |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 17:37 - Nov 10 with 1216 views | Mullet |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 13:42 - Nov 10 by Mookamoo |
Some frontline staff already have to be vaccinated for Hepatitis B. |
I thought they all did actually because it’s requirement to enter training etc. Perhaps senior staff don’t through grandfather rights? | |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 18:05 - Nov 10 with 1195 views | DanTheMan |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 15:14 - Nov 10 by Digger77 |
I think her issue was with B). |
That doesn't explain A though. There would need to be some reason you'd think this vaccine would causes fertility issues. |  |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 18:29 - Nov 10 with 1171 views | GlasgowBlue |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 18:05 - Nov 10 by DanTheMan |
That doesn't explain A though. There would need to be some reason you'd think this vaccine would causes fertility issues. |
I'm still waiting for my balls to go the same size as Niki Minaj's cousin. |  |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 20:18 - Nov 10 with 1078 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 16:21 - Nov 10 by braveblue |
So you believe over 100,000 will walk away on 1 April? Why not look at what happened in care homes. 82,000 not vaccinated and last weekend it was 32,000. Medical staff will lose all support if they think vulnerable people want to be in hospital with non vaccinated staff looking after them. |
If I was in hospital I would be more than happy to be looked after by regularly tested PPR wearing staff whatever their vaccination status. |  |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 21:02 - Nov 10 with 1033 views | Mullet |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 20:18 - Nov 10 by BanksterDebtSlave |
If I was in hospital I would be more than happy to be looked after by regularly tested PPR wearing staff whatever their vaccination status. |
The NHS is on its arse, the cost of vaccinating people over regular testing seems to be the most sensible argument to me. Let alone the fact that you are then passing weakened pathogens around.
A colleague has just been off, her and her husband didn't get vaccinated and it completely put them on their asses for 2 weeks and she's back in still suffering. Snr had it and although much older, seemed sharper a lot quicker.
This whole libertarian Magna Carta type stuff people are throwing around just seems so childish to me. Allowing much more harm to many more people because of misguided senses of liberty is a huge blight on this country.
Part of me wonders if this sowing of division so publicly is another move to creep privatisation on us. That's an evil we all should fight first and front and centre. | |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 21:14 - Nov 10 with 1013 views | Swansea_Blue |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 21:02 - Nov 10 by Mullet |
The NHS is on its arse, the cost of vaccinating people over regular testing seems to be the most sensible argument to me. Let alone the fact that you are then passing weakened pathogens around.
A colleague has just been off, her and her husband didn't get vaccinated and it completely put them on their asses for 2 weeks and she's back in still suffering. Snr had it and although much older, seemed sharper a lot quicker.
This whole libertarian Magna Carta type stuff people are throwing around just seems so childish to me. Allowing much more harm to many more people because of misguided senses of liberty is a huge blight on this country.
Part of me wonders if this sowing of division so publicly is another move to creep privatisation on us. That's an evil we all should fight first and front and centre. |
It's all a load of bollox innit. Attempts to save lives and reduce illness being weaponised and undermined by a bunch of cranks and murky, dodgily funded influencers. We deserve what we get as a species if we let people like that get to us. |  |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 21:51 - Nov 10 with 977 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 15:16 - Nov 10 by Digger77 |
There is no evidence either way. That's kind of the issue. |
No. It really isn't.
There is no evidence either way that the vaccine might boost your bank balance by £1M and make 1% of those people who have it live forever.
However, on what are you basing your hypothesis? If there is no reason to come up with your hypothesis, there need be no evidence to disprove it. Your hypothesis is just nonsense. |  |
| |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 07:05 - Nov 12 with 791 views | Lightworker |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 11:57 - Nov 10 by StokieBlue |
Whilst you've made it clear that you don't want to hear from me on covid related issues I still feel I should add context and evidence to things which you post which I feel are incorrect.
"The problem is that the vaccines are not really doing as good a job as hoped in preventing transmission and therefore the 'protecting the wider community' element is a popular narrative that is not really backed up by the real world evidence."
This seems to be incorrect given the studies published in the last few days.
There has just been a study based on a large dataset from Israel (1.2m people) published in the Lancet which shows the 3rd booster dose drastically decreases the risk of infection and hospitalisation. A decrease in infection risk is obviously a decrease in the chance of passing it on.
Lancet Study:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02249-2/fullt
Medical blog interpreting the results:
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/third-dose-prevents-infection/
Studies are showing that protection seems to start waning at 3 months after the second dose hence from that point people are more likely to get infected and pass it on. Boosters seem to do an excellent job of stopping that.
SB |
I am quite happy to hear from you or anybody else on Covid related issues, i'm not sure where you got that idea from? I did challenge you regarding your rather aggressive stance towards other posters on masks, but of course you are free to post as you see fit.
On that subject, I asked if you had any real world data to back up your position which I note you did not respond to, perhaps when time permits you could take a look at that?
The study you have posted here really highlights the point I am making. I don't doubt a third dose will give an initial boost to immunity but the fact we are having to give a third dose within the space of 12 months points to a degree of failure in terms of preventing transmission and a short lived effect.
In every age group above 30 in the UK there are currently more cases per 100'00 of population in the vaccinated than there are in the unvaccinated according to Government data. I don't think many people would have expected this to be the case at this stage, I certainly didn't. I don't remember the vaccines being initially sold to the public initially as one you would need to take 2/4 times per year to maintain an immunity against infection.
As somebody that is pro-vaccine and had two doses of AZ I am happy with the level of protection I have gained from a severe Covid outcome but not so impressed with the ability of the vaccine to prevent me getting infected and passing it on.
The truth is we don't know how long immunity from a 3rd dose will last at this stage but can only assume it will be another 3 before it starts dropping off again, on this basis I don't personally believe it is right to mandate the vaccine for NHS staff, the vast majority of whom have chosen to be vaccinated anyway. The benefit to forcing the minority to comply cannot be quantified without taking prior infection and natural immunity into the equation and I suspect will be marginal at best. For me the damage that will be be done in terms of loss of resource and in setting a precedent for future mandates across other sectors will far outweigh any potential benefit.
You might want to consider the study below covering 68 countries and 2947 counties in the US which found - "At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/
We can see further evidence of this in countries such as Ireland. In Co Waterford 99.5% of adults over the age of 18 are double-jabbed, that's thought to be one of the highest rates of any region anywhere in the world, the county now has a 14-day incidence rate of 1,294 per 100k.
I think you may be familiar with the Lancet study on household transmission which concluded that vaccination was not effectively preventing the spread of Delta in the household setting where contact and exposure is prolonged. This is quite relevant when talking about line NHS workers and carers who work in similar close proximity to their patients. If the vaccines are not going to make a significant impact on transmission then there is no case for mandating them.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fullt |  | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 08:03 - Nov 12 with 745 views | Lightworker |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 12:01 - Nov 10 by StokieBlue |
" Studies from more than one country have shown that less than 1% of people with prior infection get re-infected"
When time allows can you please post these multiple studies?
The evidence I've seen indicates that naturally provided immunity is no better than vaccine provided immunity and in many cases it's worse because it's less consistent.
SB |
If you have drawn that conclusion then I can only assume you have not taken on board enough evidence or you are cherry picking that which suits your pre-determined belief, hopefully the former.
There is a large body of evidence that shows natural immunity to be robust and long lasting. Here is just a selection.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415V1
"SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected"
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2.full.pdf
"Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained
unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study"
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/01632787211047932
"There is consistent epidemiologic evidence that prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provides substantial immunity to repeat SARS-CoV-2 infection. Prior SARS-CoV-2 infections provide similar protection when compared to vaccination for SARS-CoV-2"
https://www.cureus.com/articles/72074-equivalency-of-protection-from-natural-imm
"Overall, our comprehensive systematic review identified nine clinical studies of various designs, of which seven could be included in a pooled analysis. From a review of these studies, we conclude that there is currently no statistical advantage to vaccination in the COVID-naive compared to natural immunity in the COVID-recovered. Vaccination in the COVID-recovered may provide some incremental protective benefit, but the total size of this benefit is marginal"
The BMJ piece below contains links to numerous further studies on the responses tab at the bottom of page 1. The following comment is also highly relevant -
"For your information, please be advised that the Dutch government announced this week (November 2nd, 2021) its decision to extend the duration of the natural immunity certificate from 180 days to 365 days ( https://www.eerstekamer.nl/behandeling/20211102/brief_van_de_minister_va...
The government’s decision is based on the advice of the Dutch Outbreak Management Team. In its advice, the OMT also refers to this German report of the German virology community, which also proposes to extend the natural immunity certificate to 365 days"
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101/rapid-responses
Of course none of this means that it is a good idea to try and get infected instead of getting vaccinated, but what it does prove is that any Government policy or mandate which ignores natural immunity in the unvaccinated is not acknowledging the full range of science and suggests either incompetence or willful ignorance. | | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 08:09 - Nov 12 with 731 views | Lightworker |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 14:24 - Nov 10 by ElderGrizzly |
Most aren't claiming that though. They are just simply anti-vaxx. |
Maybe are but equally they may have looked at the data and realised their personal risk from Covid is very low and that their prior exposure to Covid provides a fairly robust immunity. On top of this they may have concluded that the vaccines do not a great job in preventing transmission and have therefore made a quite logical and reasonable decision. [Post edited 12 Nov 2021 8:13]
| | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 08:10 - Nov 12 with 731 views | Lightworker |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 08:18 - Nov 10 by Vic |
Lightly, Id be interested to see your workings out for the first sentence of of your answer (some peer reviewed studies, stats, etc?) because those close to me in the medical (dr and a nurse) are saying something different. [Post edited 10 Nov 2021 8:19]
|
Vic, see my response to Stokie. | | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 08:49 - Nov 12 with 693 views | StokieBlue |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 07:05 - Nov 12 by Lightworker |
I am quite happy to hear from you or anybody else on Covid related issues, i'm not sure where you got that idea from? I did challenge you regarding your rather aggressive stance towards other posters on masks, but of course you are free to post as you see fit.
On that subject, I asked if you had any real world data to back up your position which I note you did not respond to, perhaps when time permits you could take a look at that?
The study you have posted here really highlights the point I am making. I don't doubt a third dose will give an initial boost to immunity but the fact we are having to give a third dose within the space of 12 months points to a degree of failure in terms of preventing transmission and a short lived effect.
In every age group above 30 in the UK there are currently more cases per 100'00 of population in the vaccinated than there are in the unvaccinated according to Government data. I don't think many people would have expected this to be the case at this stage, I certainly didn't. I don't remember the vaccines being initially sold to the public initially as one you would need to take 2/4 times per year to maintain an immunity against infection.
As somebody that is pro-vaccine and had two doses of AZ I am happy with the level of protection I have gained from a severe Covid outcome but not so impressed with the ability of the vaccine to prevent me getting infected and passing it on.
The truth is we don't know how long immunity from a 3rd dose will last at this stage but can only assume it will be another 3 before it starts dropping off again, on this basis I don't personally believe it is right to mandate the vaccine for NHS staff, the vast majority of whom have chosen to be vaccinated anyway. The benefit to forcing the minority to comply cannot be quantified without taking prior infection and natural immunity into the equation and I suspect will be marginal at best. For me the damage that will be be done in terms of loss of resource and in setting a precedent for future mandates across other sectors will far outweigh any potential benefit.
You might want to consider the study below covering 68 countries and 2947 counties in the US which found - "At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/
We can see further evidence of this in countries such as Ireland. In Co Waterford 99.5% of adults over the age of 18 are double-jabbed, that's thought to be one of the highest rates of any region anywhere in the world, the county now has a 14-day incidence rate of 1,294 per 100k.
I think you may be familiar with the Lancet study on household transmission which concluded that vaccination was not effectively preventing the spread of Delta in the household setting where contact and exposure is prolonged. This is quite relevant when talking about line NHS workers and carers who work in similar close proximity to their patients. If the vaccines are not going to make a significant impact on transmission then there is no case for mandating them.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fullt |
I'm not sure why you felt boosters wouldn't be required, the scientists were fairly clear on this from the start so I am not sure it's right to say that wasn't the way the vaccine was "sold" to the public.
"As somebody that is pro-vaccine and had two doses of AZ I am happy with the level of protection I have gained from a severe Covid outcome but not so impressed with the ability of the vaccine to prevent me getting infected and passing it on.
The vaccines originally did an excellent job of preventing transmission of the alpha variant, however the higher R of the delta variant meant the effectiveness of stopping transmission seems to drop over time. If that can be stopped by spending 5 minutes getting a booster then the arguments against seem a bit petty to me. The study I posted (which is very recent) shows that having a booster vastly reduces the persons ability to become infected and to transmit the infection so having a booster surely allays your concerns on that front?
"We can see further evidence of this in countries such as Ireland. In Co Waterford 99.5% of adults over the age of 18 are double-jabbed, that's thought to be one of the highest rates of any region anywhere in the world, the county now has a 14-day incidence rate of 1,294 per 100k."
The relevance here is when they were double-jabbed. This all links back to my original point that having the booster is vital if we want to reduce transmission, reduce cases, prevent hospital admissions and minimise the risk of long covid. It's also hard to isolate transmission factors, there might be a local factor which means many people were mixing heavily indoors with poor ventilation.
Thanks for posting the study. A few points:
- Higher vaccination levels probably mean less restrictions and more scope for the virus to infect people. Couple that with waning immunity and it's not that surprising that places with higher vaccination numbers but less restrictions see an increase in cases. Get the booster.
- The place mainly cited in the study is Israel which we know had waning immunity as they were just about the first place to get their population vaccinated. The study I posted is more recent that the one you've cited and it clearly shows that in Israel the transmission rates dropped fairly drastically after the booster. I would argue that if anything, the study you've posted highlights even more why people need to get their boosters.
I am aware of the Lancet study you've cited and once again that was conducted quite a while after their vaccinations and actually highlighted the waning immunity being a key factor in the household transmission. It's once again a good case for having the booster.
SB |  | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 08:55 - Nov 12 with 691 views | StokieBlue |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 08:03 - Nov 12 by Lightworker |
If you have drawn that conclusion then I can only assume you have not taken on board enough evidence or you are cherry picking that which suits your pre-determined belief, hopefully the former.
There is a large body of evidence that shows natural immunity to be robust and long lasting. Here is just a selection.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415V1
"SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected"
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v2.full.pdf
"Among the 52238 included employees, 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22777 (41%) of 49659 not previously infected. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection remained almost zero among previously infected unvaccinated subjects, previously infected subjects who were vaccinated, and previously uninfected subjects who were vaccinated, compared with a steady increase in cumulative incidence among previously uninfected subjects who remained unvaccinated. Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained
unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study"
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/01632787211047932
"There is consistent epidemiologic evidence that prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provides substantial immunity to repeat SARS-CoV-2 infection. Prior SARS-CoV-2 infections provide similar protection when compared to vaccination for SARS-CoV-2"
https://www.cureus.com/articles/72074-equivalency-of-protection-from-natural-imm
"Overall, our comprehensive systematic review identified nine clinical studies of various designs, of which seven could be included in a pooled analysis. From a review of these studies, we conclude that there is currently no statistical advantage to vaccination in the COVID-naive compared to natural immunity in the COVID-recovered. Vaccination in the COVID-recovered may provide some incremental protective benefit, but the total size of this benefit is marginal"
The BMJ piece below contains links to numerous further studies on the responses tab at the bottom of page 1. The following comment is also highly relevant -
"For your information, please be advised that the Dutch government announced this week (November 2nd, 2021) its decision to extend the duration of the natural immunity certificate from 180 days to 365 days ( https://www.eerstekamer.nl/behandeling/20211102/brief_van_de_minister_va...
The government’s decision is based on the advice of the Dutch Outbreak Management Team. In its advice, the OMT also refers to this German report of the German virology community, which also proposes to extend the natural immunity certificate to 365 days"
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101/rapid-responses
Of course none of this means that it is a good idea to try and get infected instead of getting vaccinated, but what it does prove is that any Government policy or mandate which ignores natural immunity in the unvaccinated is not acknowledging the full range of science and suggests either incompetence or willful ignorance. |
Thanks for posting, unfortunately I don't have time right now to read all those studies but I will try and read them as time allows.
"If you have drawn that conclusion then I can only assume you have not taken on board enough evidence or you are cherry picking that which suits your pre-determined belief, hopefully the former.
There is a large body of evidence that shows natural immunity to be robust and long lasting. Here is just a selection."
I'm not sure you can accuse one of cherry picking and then go on to cite only studies which you feel support your position. There are also plenty of studies out there which show that vaccine based immunity is more consistent than natural immunity (because the response is more guaranteed), doesn't come with the risk of long covid and doesn't involve getting the virus and thus becoming a vector of transmission to someone else.
Many studies actually say that natural immunity coupled with vaccine based immunity gives the highest protection but once again we don't want people to have to get covid in the first place.
There doesn't seem to be a consensus on this at the moment so as it stands vaccine based immunity would seem to still be the main focus given the consistency of the immune response.
SB [Post edited 12 Nov 2021 9:00]
| | | |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 16:19 - Nov 13 with 550 views | BlueBadger |
| NHS mandatory vaccines on 11:34 - Nov 10 by Digger77 |
A lot of NHS workers are women of child bearing age, and they are concerned about the long-term affects on their fertility, among other things. Just heard a nurse saying this on talkradio. |
Oh piss off, you desperate, tragic Paz tribute act. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
