Will the Government actually follow through on their threat to sack NHS staff?

[DontWantTheRivalry]

I work in a very large city hospital, we are also a specialist trauma centre with Helipad access (just to give you an idea of how large a hospital it is).

I found out yesterday that almost 13% of the medical staff are unvaccinated.

Surely that number of staff can’t just be fired? How do they expect a hospital to function with such a mass exodus whilst already dealing with staff shortages in nearly every department.

It’s very worrying.

Disingenuous anti vaccine post @Flyonawalk - there’s already substantial literature on cardiac side effects of the vaccines - just try google, and these effects are being actively monitored for by regulatory authorities. Hardly a situation where doctors are ‘afraid to speak out.’

And COVID infection carries a substantially higher risk of cardiac complications than the vaccine.

‘COVID-19 contributes to cardiovascular complications, including acute myocardial injury as a result of acute coronary syndrome, myocarditis, stress-cardiomyopathy, arrhythmias, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest.’

heart.bmj.com/content/106/15/1132

@doublemonkey
As you seem to be suggesting that people will do things that are morally suspect for money, can you comment on whether a company who will make hunderds of billions from making vaccines might be motivated to fluff some data and discredit some trial participants in order to roll out their product?

Spreading misinformation on youtube can be lucrative, and usually it isn't illegal, even if it's obvious they are lies (how often are the likes of Alex Jones and David Icke sued and/or convicted?). Consequently a fair number of people earn a good income doing it (I have never watched John Campbell's videos, so I don't know if it's fair to include him in this category).
Corporations spreading lies about their own products is a completely different kettle of fish.

A good job for a vaccine sceptic is to investigate whether the virologists have taken their vaccines. If not, you will publish an article, everyone will immediately conclude the vaccines are probably very risky and you will probably win a Pulitzer. If you discover they have been vaccinated, you could conclude they are morons who have taken the vaccine despite knowledge that they fudged their results. Or maybe - just maybe - you would conclude that the virologists knew more than the amateur contrarians.

@TreborBore Hardly disingenuous to quote an eminent cardiologist who is speaking on behalf of colleagues. Is doesn’t sound as if Dr Malhotra is confident that appropriate data has been gathered on the effect of the vaccines on cardiac health.

I have never watched John Campbell's videos...

That's obvious from your gaslighty comment.

Maybe you should watch one though, right? Otherwise you're just spouting made up nonsense and you know, cough.. spreading misinformation..👀

No people won’t be losing their jobs or deciding the leave

They will have to update this proposal

We have a few staff that are choosing not to be vaccinated. We also have patients that are choosing not to (mh)

We get endless emails with links etc telling us why. This has had the opposite impact they were hoping foe it just gets peoples back up

Far better approach is to say the choice is yours let them tell you why (as many want to vent)

Our biggest challenge is young staff _ better way forward is vaccine passports to get as many people vaccinated as possible (not being able to travel changed peoples mind too)

[quote Flyonawalk]@TreborBore Hardly disingenuous to quote an eminent cardiologist who is speaking on behalf of colleagues. Is doesn’t sound as if Dr Malhotra is confident that appropriate data has been gathered on the effect of the vaccines on cardiac health.[/quote]
I don't think eminent is quite the right word when Malhotra has (pre-pandemic) been criticised by the BHF regarding his views on statins and dietary advice, which were labelled as a threat to public health.

He recent claims on cardiac complications are equally problematic - this has been an active area of research and survellaince. Not sure how we would be aware of peri/myocarditis caused by vaccination if it was the case that it wasn't being monitored.

Quick scan of his timeline indicates he's also anti-mask
Dr Aseem Malhotra FRCP Retweeted
Neil Clark
@NeilClark66
·
4h
I will not be wearing a mask in shops or public transport. Enough is enough of this mask masquerade.

Why is there this trend that people who are opposed to vaccination are also anti-mask? Two unrealted viewpoints that shouldn't be correlated, yet somehow, they are.

@doublemonkey
*The current 'vaccine' is not a vaccine as we know them. It's an experimental RNA therapy which has it's own risks and it doesn't actually prevent you from catching or passing on Covid.

On balance it would seem that the measures we are taking are way out of proportion to the amount of people who have serious complications from Covid. Strong-arming people into having an injection we know little about in response to an illness which will adversely affect only a very tiny percentage is not the way out of this.

We need to be having open and honest conversations about where we go from here.*

I agree there needs to be a conversation. We need a consistent set of policies and the public needs to largely agree to comply with measures. I am sceptical this can be achieved, so I think it might have been sensible for the government to admit defeat rather than re-introduce measures in response to omicron.

I think your point that a small proportion get ill or die from covid is reasonable. But the same is true of healthcare itself - most people (for most of their children and most of adulthood) rarely visit the doctor and very rarely visit the hospital. A small number of people (many of them elderly) are responsible for a large proportion of NHS resources.
So would it really matter much if the NHS sacked 5-10% of its staff? It would primarily affect the small proportion of people who are significant users of the NHS. Why should we be more concerned about them than those at high risk from covid? (there is quite a lot of overlap, which makes it even harder to see why there should be a distinction).

Funny you should bring that up because both my parents suffered blood clots following the vaccine shots and I know of one person who died two days after his first jab of arterial thrombosis.

Gosh aren't you unlucky! I have heard tales of people who supposedly became ill or died after vaccines, these tales were always told by anti-vaxxers, and they were all proven to be a crock of shit.

The current 'vaccine' is not a vaccine as we know them. It's an experimental RNA therapy which has it's own risks and it doesn't actually prevent you from catching or passing on Covid.

-The mRNA vaccines are not experimental, they have been approved
-They are not "RNA therapy", mRNA cannot interact with your cells RNA (be it mRNA/tRNA/riRNA). mRNA also cannot interact with your DNA, which seems to be another claim going around.
-they significantly reduce both infection and transmission

HTH

Would be nice to have this debate without the constant derailing by misinformation

^@doublemonkey

@Kosmin - an interesting perspective. You could argue the same about insurance. You might never need it, but it's great to have it there for when you do.

I don't think the NHS will fire any staff. There'd be lawsuits all round if they did. They're trying to frighten and intimidate people and that's repugnant.

@gofg

Funny you should bring that up because both my parents suffered blood clots following the vaccine shots and I know of one person who died two days after his first jab of arterial thrombosis.

Gosh aren't you unlucky! I have heard tales of people who supposedly became ill or died after vaccines, these tales were always told by anti-vaxxers, and they were all proven to be a crock of shit.

Gosh you sound lovely.

@doublemonkey
*That's obvious from your gaslighty comment.

Maybe you should watch one though, right? Otherwise you're just spouting made up nonsense and you know, cough.. spreading misinformation..👀*

I'm not sure if you have poor reading comprehension. I said I hadn't watched his videos, so I couldn't and wouldn't comment on whether he spreads misinformation. What's that got to do with gaslighting?

I explained the difference between spreading misinformation and lying about product testing as you implied you were unaware of the distinction:
"As you seem to be suggesting that people will do things that are morally suspect for money, can you comment on whether a company who will make hunderds of billions from making vaccines might be motivated to fluff some data and discredit some trial participants in order to roll out their product?"

@leafyygreens

The current 'vaccine' is not a vaccine as we know them. It's an experimental RNA therapy which has it's own risks and it doesn't actually prevent you from catching or passing on Covid.

-The mRNA vaccines are not experimental, they have been approved
-They are not "RNA therapy", mRNA cannot interact with your cells RNA (be it mRNA/tRNA/riRNA). mRNA also cannot interact with your DNA, which seems to be another claim going around.
-they significantly reduce both infection and transmission

HTH

Would be nice to have this debate without the constant derailing by misinformation

The RNA shots are experimental and have been given emergency approval. We have no idea what affect they will have long term.

You're the one derailing the thread with misinformation.

I don't think the NHS will fire any staff. There'd be lawsuits all round if they did. They're trying to frighten and intimidate people and that's repugnant.

I agree.

Plus, didn’t they say you had to be doubly vaccinated by the start of April so therefore, unless someone has had their first vaccine by the end of February they’re out because they won’t be able to be double jabbed in the time frame?

@Flyonawalk

Hopefully the tide is turning.

Did anyone see consultant cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra on GM news? He spoke about his belief that the vaccines are causing severe cardiac damage, and said this needs urgent investigation. He appealed for an end to vaccine mandates.

Dr Malhotra appealed to his colleagues who are convinced of vaccine damage but are afraid to speak out to ‘look in the mirror’. His view is that the silent doctors are on the wrong side of history, and that the public will not forgive them for their silence.

It's really scary to think that there are doctors out there who are so horribly misinformed that they would risk patient safety.

Then again, I have had some truly incompetent GPs in my time.

Also, the NHS WILL fire anyone who hasn't had the vaccine. If you refuse all the other vaccines you need to work in the NHS you do NOT get the job. It's as simple as that.

I am willing to bet 99% of the clinical staff had zero issue getting their Hep/tetanus/flu vaccines which they required to have prior to employment. I bet they didn't consult Dr Google about them either.

I am willing to bet 99% of the clinical staff had zero issue getting their Hep/tetanus/flu vaccines which they required to have prior to employment. I bet they didn't consult Dr Google about them either.

Hepatitis and Tetanus vaccines have been around for years and years and so people trust their safety. Those vaccines also generally protect the individual from getting the disease and don’t require top-ups every 6 months for God knows how long.

Flu vaccines are not mandatory.

If vaccination had been a condition of employment when they had signed the contract then yes they should abide by it but they are already employed so this is a new development. It is possible to argue that many changes happen whilst you are employed - but I belie that vaccination is different as it is personal choice.

I think it was wrong to make vaccination a condition of employment for healthcare workers and believe the same is true of the NHS

@DontWantTheRivalry

I am willing to bet 99% of the clinical staff had zero issue getting their Hep/tetanus/flu vaccines which they required to have prior to employment. I bet they didn't consult Dr Google about them either.

Hepatitis and Tetanus vaccines have been around for years and years and so people trust their safety. Those vaccines also generally protect the individual from getting the disease and don’t require top-ups every 6 months for God knows how long.

Flu vaccines are not mandatory.

This is incorrect and I'm suprised you're unware as a clinician?

There are many specific healthcare roles which specifcally require the 'flu vaccine - intensivist being the most obvious.

The GMC makes the statement the clinicians should be immunised against "relevant" infectious diseases. Obviously the definition of relevant is context dependent.

Do you agree with all the misinformed claims about vaccination being spread on your thread?

@DontWantTheRivalry

I don't think the NHS will fire any staff. There'd be lawsuits all round if they did. They're trying to frighten and intimidate people and that's repugnant.

I agree.

Plus, didn’t they say you had to be doubly vaccinated by the start of April so therefore, unless someone has had their first vaccine by the end of February they’re out because they won’t be able to be double jabbed in the time frame?

Well my trust has sent out communication to advise all unvaccinated staff that want to stay in a clinical role that they need to have had first jab by 3/2/22.....in order to be fully vaccinated by April. Also in my trust the numbers of vaccinated staff are not yet fully known.....as some staff ( including myself ) had their immunisations via their GP.....so percentages will go up in February when the Trust are planning to ask all staff for proof of vaccination.

As a nurse, on the ward I work on, having the flu vaccine has always been optional. It is of course encouraged but we don’t have to have it.

I have been a nurse for about 15 years now and I’ve probably had the vaccine about 2-3 times. I haven’t had it this year and it isn’t something we are asked about.

Which claims are you asking if I agree with?

I obviously agree with the need for vaccines otherwise I wouldn’t have had all 3 of mine, I just don’t agree that staff should be forced into having it or be fired if they don’t.

@DontWantTheRivalry

As a nurse, on the ward I work on, having the flu vaccine has always been optional. It is of course encouraged but we don’t have to have it.

I have been a nurse for about 15 years now and I’ve probably had the vaccine about 2-3 times. I haven’t had it this year and it isn’t something we are asked about.

Which claims are you asking if I agree with?

I obviously agree with the need for vaccines otherwise I wouldn’t have had all 3 of mine, I just don’t agree that staff should be forced into having it or be fired if they don’t.

Yup, this doesn't change the fact that flu vaccinations are mandatory for some roles, as I said?

I gave the example of intensivist.

You claimed flu vaccines are not mandatory

Which claims are you asking if I agree with?
All of them! Vaccines are "experimental RNA therapy", they don't stop transmission, they cause unprecented side effects etc etc

Well my trust has sent out communication to advise all unvaccinated staff that want to stay in a clinical role that they need to have had first jab by 3/2/22...

So are the staff who don’t have the first vaccine by that date then not allowed back into work in their normal clinical role? Or are they assuming those who will not get vaccinated will continue to work until April and then just leave?