Mandatory vaccines for care workers now law.

[MercyBooth]

Big Brother Watch
@BigBrotherWatch
·
2h
Police cars revolving lightBREAKING

Mandatory vaccines for care workers is now law. Millions more workers will be affected.

The House of Lords passed the new law after just 90 minutes debate, with a regret motion noting there is insufficient evidence for it and that the severity of impact is unknown.

twitter.com/BigBrotherWatch/status/1417573871130234883?s=20

@chocolateorangeinhaler

*Who would you save, the 49 year old with kids or a 93 year old with dementia?

Very difficult decisions had to me made.*

I am a thirty seven year old with kids.

Why should I have to run the risk of a new medical treatment which is of no tangible benefit to me but provides an extra layer of protection to a presently vaccinated ninety three year old with dementia?

It is essential that I remain healthy and economically active enough to provide for my children.

Or don't I matter because I work in social care?

@ivykaty44 How many other vaccines do you know about which were rolled out under emergency usage? What do you think emergency usage means? www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1244

Look, people have a right to choose what is pumped into their body. They have a right to be fully informed of the possible consequences. At the moment there is still some guess work. Not to mention, people still getting, and dying from covid after both jabs. It’s perhaps not the saviour that the medical world, and government thought it would be.

I just don’t think people are being unreasonable in wanting to hold fire for now

[quote ZednotZee]@chocolateorangeinhaler

*Who would you save, the 49 year old with kids or a 93 year old with dementia?

Very difficult decisions had to me made.*

I am a thirty seven year old with kids.

Why should I have to run the risk of a new medical treatment which is of no tangible benefit to me but provides an extra layer of protection to a presently vaccinated ninety three year old with dementia?

It is essential that I remain healthy and economically active enough to provide for my children.

Or don't I matter because I work in social care?[/quote]
Sadly I think the last line of your great post there is the root of the problem.

Wasn't so long ago teachers were up in arms (possibly other sectors too, but they're the ones I saw talking about it) that care workers were going to be prioritised for the vaccines when they were rolled out because some felt they were more at risk themselves and to the students and there was more to lose in education than social care.

All gone a bit quiet on that front now that it's been mandated for care workers....... 🤔

@Iquitit

Indeed.

When you start to join up the dots it now makes perfect sense why the vaccine was offered to SC staff as a priority.

It was always the plan to begin the mandation with our sector.

@chocolateorangeinhaler So you admit that they deliberately wernt tested first just in case they would have to be kept in hospital. Couple this with the DNR orders that were slapped on people without consent and its no wonder that NHS blue ticks on Twitter and in the media are on the "look at the Covidiots over there" rhetoric.

And there are care workers who are vulnerable to this disease and were vulnerable last year while the NHS were doing that while there were no vaccines. Did NHS managers see them as expendable too.

@MercyBooth

And there are care workers who are vulnerable to this disease and were vulnerable last year while the NHS were doing that while there were no vaccines. Did NHS managers see them as expendable too.

@MercyBooth

To be fair, many employers redeployed staff who were vulnerable to Covid. The care sector was no different.

The truly bizarre thing is that there is an alternative. Ivermectin is a drug which has been used safely for 50 years and there are plenty of peer reviewed papers to show it is just as effective against preventing the spread of covid as any of the jabs. Why not give people the choice?

I’m not sure it’s the answer. I’m just about to leave a care setting and the staffing levels are quite frankly dangerous. We can’t even get agency to cover half the time. Many of the services loyal staff haven’t taken up the vaccine. (And these staff are like gold dust trust me they don’t come around often in this sector). This is the final push for many to now go into retail or hospitality.

I guess it’s all well and good saying they should be vaccinated and in a perfect world they would be but this sector is so so understaffed and complex and tbh I’ve had my eyes wide opened the past few months.

I think it’s also worth stating that being a carer is a “job”. It’s not a vocation like nursing. It’s tough and physically brutal (it’s been hell the past week in the heat). Carers don’t care, they provide it.

I feel so bloody grateful I have the educational resources to move away from this job. It’s been physically draining, mentally draining and quite frankly soul destroying.

@Steamedhams

The truly bizarre thing is that there is an alternative. Ivermectin is a drug which has been used safely for 50 years and there are plenty of peer reviewed papers to show it is just as effective against preventing the spread of covid as any of the jabs. Why not give people the choice?

Links please.

I didn't know this so I've just googled it, from scan reading the article from Oxford university, it would seem that it reduces symptoms/viral load and improves recovery and is being tested on positive cases.
I think (in theory) that if it works then giving people more at risk regular ivermectin could have a similar effect to the vaccine should they catch it (I'm no expert so might be wrong, purely speculating).

However I can see issues with that, cost being one of them, because it's going to cost an awful lot Vs a vaccine, plus any effects that may occur from taking an antiviral drug basically indefinitely, and still requires care workers to take it, when they might not want to, and take it correctly for as long as they're in the job.

It's heartening though to read that there's something else that could be available for treatment of this, that can only be good news.

www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-06-23-ivermectin-be-investigated-possible-treatment-covid-19-oxford-s-principle-trial

@Steamedhams

The truly bizarre thing is that there is an alternative. Ivermectin is a drug which has been used safely for 50 years and there are plenty of peer reviewed papers to show it is just as effective against preventing the spread of covid as any of the jabs. Why not give people the choice?

There is currently no good quality evidence to suggest ivermectin is a useful treatment for COVID. Indeed, the one RCT which found large positive effects (which was low quality anyway but people carefully ignored this) has just been found to have been fraud - it was never conducted. This changes the results of all the meta analyses claiming to have found positive evidence

This is a good overview: twitter.com/GidMK/status/1417347783372144640

We need good quality RCTs to demonstrate if there is evidence for efficacy, which is what oxford and others are doing.

The claims about ivermectin come up again and again on MN (pushed by the usual suspects on social media), this is probably one of the most recent threads:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4286872-Ivermectin-India

there are plenty of peer reviewed papers to show it is just as effective against preventing the spread of covid as any of the jabs

Looking at what others has posted it seems this is just another outright anti-vax lie, then? Ivermectin is not a preventative yet or even a proven treatment. Shame on you @Steamedhams for trying to spread this bollocks.

I'm glad I'm planning to go to Dignitas when my time comes. I want a good death - but particularly after reading these threads and the pandemic in general, no way do I want to be in a care home. Particularly since the 'care' is, we're told on this thread and other similar ones, so lacking. Unsafe care (be it poor staffing levels and training or unvaccinated staff) is not care. But - that is a choice I made freely. No way should people feel coerced into taking that option out of desperation due to unavailability of safe care.

Why on earth are people encouraged to give up or never start smoking? It's clear there's severe underfunding for elderly care - and very little care in terms of policy and willingness to fund, i.e. increased NI payments to care for the people who've paid their taxes for 40/50 years (currently it's the generation who tended to leave school at 15/16 and straight to work - the generation born before the creation of the welfare state and the NHS, who went through WW2 as children or young adults, sacrificed a lot. They deserve dignity and safety at the end of their lives).

Smoking might shorten life but the alternative - reliant on potentially unsafe care and viewed as unworthy of being protected from Covid - doesn't look too appealing from where I'm standing. Plus, the tax raised from smoking would help fund care home costs for those who weren't seen off by cigarettes.

I thought Ivermectin had just been finally proved as useless. I read it somewhere this week.

I know France and US have said all care workers need to be vaccinated along with other countries tried l can’t remember. Not like it’s a suprise.

Nicotine has anti inflammatory properties.

I'm not a sodding antivaxxer.

Since people asked for links

www.medicalpressopenaccess.com/single_article.php?refid=82
covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/ this has a collection of data
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04701710

I have just picked out a few.

I am shocked that people can't be open minded enough to think there might be another way to treat this god awful virus. The pharmaceutical industry has a vested interest in promoting the vaccines over ivermectin as it is out of patent and so is very cheap to make. I'm not dissing the vaccines but ivermectin offers an opportunity to reach herd immunity without resorting to dictatorial methods. If some antivaxxer takes ivermectin and helps us reach the goal of herd immunity then why not use it?

Is smoking allowed in care homes?
It should be.
Personal responsibility.

If ivermectin does help, it wouldn't negate the need for vaccines. Prevention is better than cure.

@Tealightsandd

Suffering from lung cancer or COPD isn’t particularly pleasant. Besides, it isn’t just underfunding of care. That’s far too simplistic. There is a rapidly ageing population.

@Steamedhams

I'm not a sodding antivaxxer.

Since people asked for links

www.medicalpressopenaccess.com/single_article.php?refid=82
covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/ this has a collection of data
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04701710

I have just picked out a few.

I am shocked that people can't be open minded enough to think there might be another way to treat this god awful virus. The pharmaceutical industry has a vested interest in promoting the vaccines over ivermectin as it is out of patent and so is very cheap to make. I'm not dissing the vaccines but ivermectin offers an opportunity to reach herd immunity without resorting to dictatorial methods. If some antivaxxer takes ivermectin and helps us reach the goal of herd immunity then why not use it?

@Steamedhams

Covid critical care (FLCC) are yet another anti-vax group peddling dodgy science

Again, there is no robust evidence that ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID. The individual studies are low quality and at very high risk of bias, meaning any observed effects are biased.

I am shocked that people can't be open minded enough to think there might be another way to treat this god awful virus.

@Steamedhams

The evidence for ivermectin has been assessed, it hasn't been blocked or covered up, many many epidemiologists have gone through and reviewed these studies with an "open mind". There simply isn't any good quality evidence that it works, and it is harmful to push a treatment with no evidence behind it's efficacy onto the general population.

my final post on this as it's an important thread that shouldn't be derailed

The pharmaceutical industry has a vested interest in promoting the vaccines over ivermectin as it is out of patent and so is very cheap to make
@Steamedhams Since the beginning of the pandemic, RCTs have been set up to test whether existing drugs (including many cheap and off patent) can be repurposed to treat COVID. Among others, dexamethasone, which is as cheap as chips, was approved using the methodology.

Why would specifically ivermectin be blocked but not others if drug companies are deliberately blocking the approval of cheap existing medications to treat COVID? This is literal just a repeat of all the claims you see on social media.

Ok since no one actually read any of the articles let me give some info from the final one I posted. This initially was a small trial which was then expanded. It looked at healthcare workers some took normal PPE precautions (masks etc) and some did PPE and ivermectin

From the paper-----
A total of 1,195 health care workers were recruited from 4 major hospitals in Argentina with 730 from Alberto Antranik Eurnekian Hospital, 150 from Hospital Municipal Angel Marzetti, 150 from Other peripheral Medical Centre and 15 from Centro Medico Caseros. 788 participants received IVERCAR and PPEs, while the remaining 407 simply adhered to standard PPEs.

Infection Rates - Pooled Results
The overall infection rate in health care workers recruited for this study was 20% with 237 testing positive for CoVid 19 during the 3 month study recruitment. Of those infected, all patients were from the comparator group of using PPE alone. This represented an overall infection rate of 58.2% ( 237 of 407) in the PPE group.

--

Just to really make that clear. Not a single person taking ivermectin caught covid. Now, it obviously is not going to be 100%. Data I am aware of puts it between 75-99% dependent on dosage and a bunch of other variables. It is certainly a signal worth investigating.

It isn't a conspiracy
It isn't a flat earth wack job idea

It is something worthy of further study independently.