Coronavirus

[Del Woppio]

It's not so much being doubtful or sceptical of lockdown or other restrictions. It's people, literally in some cases, saying 'fuck it, I'll no whatever I want.

There's no nuance in that approach either is there? Sure some of the restrictions may be excessive to certain individuals and they could still be safe by skirting a few of them but that's a much measured approach than saying you're sick of it, let the free for all commence.

But 'whatever I want' is so varied, isn't it?

Coughing and spluttering on the tube? Bad.
Going to your mates house to watch the football when you've got a snuffle? If both are happy with that, then fine.

 

[WolfMan]

It's not so much being doubtful or sceptical of lockdown or other restrictions. It's people, literally in some cases, saying 'fuck it, I'll no whatever I want.

There's no nuance in that approach either is there? Sure some of the restrictions may be excessive to certain individuals and they could still be safe by skirting a few of them but that's a much measured approach than saying you're sick of it, let the free for all commence.

To be fair I've not really seen anyone say that - more just that they'll be seeing loved ones at Christmas.

FWIW I'm still being careful, cancelled all social events in the run up etc. I think you'd have to be really quite stupid/selfish to purposely massively expose yourself and then go and see vulnerable relatives. It's just this idea that if you see your loved ones you are being selfish that gets me - it's probably going to be a tortuous choice for most.

 

[AndyWolves]

I'm sorry to hear that.

Thank you.

He was a moron to be fair and thought COVID was a conspiracy and thus didn't get vaccinated. Unfortunately it's the family that pays the price.

It certainly made me think about the ethics around vaccinates and personal choice. Is it ethical to let someone die when it can (probably) be prevented? Is it ethical to use resources on someone who made such a decision and deprive someone else of those resources who wasn't able to make a decision about their disease.

If someone is clearly believing a demonstrable falsehood should that decision be overridden by evidence based research?

I don't know the answer to this, but the impacts are being borne by everyone.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

But 'whatever I want' is so varied, isn't it?

Coughing and spluttering on the tube? Bad.
Going to your mates house to watch the football when you've got a snuffle? If both are happy with that, then fine.

It's the language people use though isn't it? No-one talks of bending the rules or slight indiscretions, it's always doing whatever the fuck they want.

If people use such forceful language then it's no surprise that people are going to assume their actions will be equally bold, reckless even. It's bad marketing.

 

[WolfMan]

Thank you.

He was a moron to be fair and thought COVID was a conspiracy and thus didn't get vaccinated. Unfortunately it's the family that pays the price.

It certainly made me think about the ethics around vaccinates and personal choice. Is it ethical to let someone die when it can (probably) be prevented? Is it ethical to use resources on someone who made such a decision and deprive someone else of those resources who wasn't able to make a decision about their disease.

If someone is clearly believing a demonstrable falsehood should that decision be overridden by evidence based research?

I don't know the answer to this, but the impacts are being borne by everyone.

Fucking deep questions aren't they mate. To be honest I don't know the answers either.

I know I probably come across like a real zealot in the way I express myself on here but I'm not really. I just worry about things getting out of control one way or the other.

 

[Del Woppio]

It's the language people use though isn't it? No-one talks of bending the rules or slight indiscretions, it's always doing whatever the fuck they want.

If people use such forceful language then it's no surprise that people are going to assume their actions will be equally bold, reckless even. It's bad marketing.

That's a fair point. I think it's just fatigue, and anger at the lies and the hypocrisy. If we go into the bubble sitch again, I will still have mates round to watch the football, and in my world that is 'fuck em, they do it, I will do what I want' but definitely accept that the language suggests more reckless behaviour.

Does that mean I'm not a murderer anymore?

 

[Del Woppio]

(have we just seen polarised opinions meeting in the middle? ON THE INTERNET?!)

 

[Tony Towner]

I'm aware that my limitations in explaining myself probably give that impression.

I basically want us to be like Sweden, would that really be so bad?

Without reading into it since lockdown one, our population density makes that pretty much impossible I think.

Personally I'm at the compulsory vaccination by stealth stage now. You can't prove your status, you don't get to go to the pub, Sainsbury's, concerts, football or anything else. You want shopping you get someone to get it for you or you get a delivery. Why should the rest of us suffer for your selfishness/naivety/stupidity? I'd make them socially unacceptable. When we go into some version of another lockdown at some point in the 2 weeks, it'll be because of them. Fuck them all

You isn't you in the above

 

[AndyWolves]

I wonder if footballers and by extension "celebrities" could do more around promoting vaccinations.

I'd imagine there is a demographic much more likely to listen to someone popular than they would the govt or scientists

 

[Del Woppio]

Without reading into it since lockdown one, our population density makes that pretty much impossible I think.

Personally I'm at the compulsory vaccination by stealth stage now. You can't prove your status, you don't get to go to the pub, Sainsbury's, concerts, football or anything else. You want shopping you get someone to get it for you or you get a delivery. Why should the rest of us suffer for your selfishness/naivety/stupidity? I'd make them socially unacceptable. When we go into some version of another lockdown at some point in the 2 weeks, it'll be because of them. Fuck them all

You isn't you in the above

100%. I read somewhere that covid icu admissions are at least 80% unvaccinated. We shouldn't suffer because of their choice.

Tbh I'd be very tempted to make people who choose not to be vaccinated pay for their covid care. It's unconsciousable that they take a bed away from somebody else

 

[WolfMan]

Without reading into it since lockdown one, our population density makes that pretty much impossible I think.

Personally I'm at the compulsory vaccination by stealth stage now. You can't prove your status, you don't get to go to the pub, Sainsbury's, concerts, football or anything else. You want shopping you get someone to get it for you or you get a delivery. Why should the rest of us suffer for your selfishness/naivety/stupidity? I'd make them socially unacceptable. When we go into some version of another lockdown at some point in the 2 weeks, it'll be because of them. Fuck them all

You isn't you in the above

I think their population density in the big cities is pretty comparable to ours.

I was watching Chris Whitty give evidence to a select committee the other day and he said that the vast majority of the unvaccinated in hospital aren't anti vaxers, they are just people who've not got round to having it yet.

That did give me pause - obviously if you put all these barriers up to normal life it would encourage these people to get it through not wanting the hassle. I saw an ethicist arguing the case for paying people to get the vaccine, avoids the civil liberty concerns. Also if it improves uptake to the desired level, it saves money in avoided costly restrictions.

 

[Throbber3]

100%. I read somewhere that covid icu admissions are at least 80% unvaccinated. We shouldn't suffer because of their choice.

Correct x 2.

 

[SSB]

I wonder if footballers and by extension "celebrities" could do more around promoting vaccinations.

I'd imagine there is a demographic much more likely to listen to someone popular than they would the govt or scientists

Hi Raul, please can you sing this down the camera lens...."Si Senor, get yourself a jab and I will score"

 

[Dire Wolf]

100%. I read somewhere that covid icu admissions are at least 80% unvaccinated. We shouldn't suffer because of their choice.

Tbh I'd be very tempted to make people who choose not to be vaccinated pay for their covid care. It's unconsciousable that they take a bed away from somebody else

I think I'd be even more ruthless. I'd basically say anyone who wilfully chooses to put the NHS and its staff under unnecessary stress and strain by choosing not to have the vaccine forfeits the right to free NHS care for good. They choose to undermine the work of the NHS, they lose the right to use it. Show them the cost of treatments and say choose this or choose vaccination.

 

[Throbber3]

Show them the cost of treatments and say choose this or choose vaccination.

Yep I can go with that.

 

[EpsomWolf]

Hi Raul, please can you sing this down the camera lens...."Si Senor, get yourself a jab and I will score"

There‘s something that the Wolves want you to know
The vaccination is the safest way to go
NHS Frontline
Let’s help them by getting jabbed this time
Si Senor
Get yourself a jab and Raul will score

 

[WsWolf]

Thank you.

He was a moron to be fair and thought COVID was a conspiracy and thus didn't get vaccinated. Unfortunately it's the family that pays the price.

It certainly made me think about the ethics around vaccinates and personal choice. Is it ethical to let someone die when it can (probably) be prevented? Is it ethical to use resources on someone who made such a decision and deprive someone else of those resources who wasn't able to make a decision about their disease.

If someone is clearly believing a demonstrable falsehood should that decision be overridden by evidence based research?

I don't know the answer to this, but the impacts are being borne by everyone.

You'd have to ask my wife who's mother had a pandemic created delay in treating her early stage cancer and subsequently passed away. Or the families two lads I know who took their own life because they were locked alone with their thoughts for months on end.

I'd hazard a guess that the impact of delays in treatment and support would dwarf actual COVID deaths. Unfortunately there's no right or wrong answer, morally everyone has the right to be treated equally but that's not reality.

 

[WsWolf]

I think I'd be even more ruthless. I'd basically say anyone who wilfully chooses to put the NHS and its staff under unnecessary stress and strain by choosing not to have the vaccine forfeits the right to free NHS care for good. They choose to undermine the work of the NHS, they lose the right to use it. Show them the cost of treatments and say choose this or choose vaccination.

Would this apply smokers and people who are morbidly obese? All create unnecessary stress on the NHS and are all choices. It's against the core principles of the NHS to do what you suggest.

 

[AndyWolves]

You'd have to ask my wife who's mother had a pandemic created delay in treating her early stage cancer and subsequently passed away. Or the families two lads I know who took their own life because they were locked alone with their thoughts for months on end.

I'd hazard a guess that the impact of delays in treatment and support would dwarf actual COVID deaths. Unfortunately there's no right or wrong answer, morally everyone has the right to be treated equally but that's not reality.

That's kind of my point, lockdowns have been required to prevent tens of thousands of excess deaths that would result from an overwhelmed health service.

We're now at a point where we have a freely available mitigation which would be highly likely to prevent the need for any further lockdowns but some people are exercising their choice not to have it. This choice has implications for everyone, I have to say that, for the greater good, I'm nudging over to the enforced vaccination camp.

Ideally though, that wouldn't be required and some other method could be found.

 

[WsWolf]

That's kind of my point, lockdowns have been required to prevent tens of thousands of excess deaths that would result from an overwhelmed health service.

We're now at a point where we have a freely available mitigation which would be highly likely to prevent the need for any further lockdowns but some people are exercising their choice not to have it. This choice has implications for everyone, I have to say that, for the greater good, I'm nudging over to the enforced vaccination camp.

Ideally though, that wouldn't be required and some other method could be found.

It's dangerous territory that I wouldn't want to even think about, it's completely against everything I believe in.