Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

U-turn on mandatory Covid vaccinations for NHS and social care workers

256 replies

WineGetsMeThroughIt · 30/01/2022 23:15

Apparently this will be announced tomorrow. Thank god there's some sense coming back into this world

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/30/front-line-health-staff-no-longer-need-covid-vaccines/

OP posts:
Theluggage15 · 01/02/2022 06:34

Good decision to u turn but should never have been suggested in the first place. Absolutely ridiculous idea. God knows how many people have been lost from social care because of this.

Sloughsabigplace · 01/02/2022 06:42

It’s far from the end of it though.

The wording of the new human rights act they want to bring in, alone with the government discussing new strategies for new variants of concern that may crop up. It will come in one day.

A reprieve now and then a new, big, scary variant now (I’m not saying for a second covid isn’t real, but I do believe the government can say what they like about variants, and let’s face it, huge swathes of the population live in complete fear and will run out for another booster and are easy to control and the government know it).

So reprieve now, big, scary it’s going to kill you all variant later in the year to sway the public yet again about those terrible “anti vaxxers” who will ruin the world for us all.

I’m so down about the whole thing. This is going to get spun out forever.

Sloughsabigplace · 01/02/2022 06:44

Fucks sake, I’m going to stop posting it’s all typos.

And I’m very invested in people not being coerced into getting a vaccine, because I was and my injustice from it is why I’m often in too much pain to sleep and my vision and concentration is fucked so I can’t type.

MrsGaskthrill · 01/02/2022 06:47

I think it’s unsurprising that people still think they are safer around vaccinated people but it’s just not proving to be true. Yes the vaccines protect against severe disease but for quite a while now more fully vaccinated people have been testing positive than unvaccinated. I imagine this had a lot to do with the U turn.

U-turn on mandatory Covid vaccinations for NHS and social care workers
BacardiOnATuesday · 01/02/2022 07:05

@Rainbowbrite2022 is right.

People think that NHS staff are testing regularly. That’s not necessarily the case.

ldontWanna · 01/02/2022 07:38

@Tealightsandd

And if you're vaccinated, it's to protect YOU.

Nope. It's both. Particularly important around vulnerable patients - some of whom, eg. those with blood cancer and other immunocompromised conditions, are less protected than other people by the vaccine.

Seriously the mind boggles. Why on earth would somebody who doesn't believe in or trust medicine and science want to work in... medicine and science?

You do realise though that vaccines don't stop you getting it or transmitting it, don't you?

Considering the new rules mean no self isolation at all (and under the current ones you can go to work after 10 days despite still testing positive) it isn't really about risk or the vulnerable is it?

110APiccadilly · 01/02/2022 08:05

@zen1

I hope all those experienced and valuable carers who lost their jobs a couple of months ago due to the compulsory vaccination policy can get their jobs back now.
Well, the one I know left for a job with a regular 9 to 5, and the ability to earn accountancy qualifications. As a nice bonus, she also no longer has to clean up bodily fluids on the regular. So I suspect she won't be going back even if she is allowed to.
SweetFelicityArkright · 01/02/2022 08:37

Considering the new rules mean no self isolation at all (and under the current ones you can go to work after 10 days despite still testing positive) it isn't really about risk or the vulnerable is it?

It's never been about protecting the vulnerable, it's been about politics. If it were about protecting the vulnerable then the NHS and social care would have enough staff and investment to care for patients and residents properly, and more to the point, there would have been a better plan in place for losing the social care workers they knew weren't vaccinated, other than paying providers yet more money and expecting the remaining staff to just pick up the slack, short changing residents on care and pocketing the money saved on short staffed shifts.
If it were about protecting the vulnerable then care workers wouldn't have been pressured into working when the isolation rules changed meaning that they had to work when living with a confirmed case, or put their jobs at risk.
If it were about protecting the vulnerable then there would still be different rules for HCPs and social care workers when isolation ends to prevent them working when they have covid and taking in to those vulnerable people.

It's been lip service by the government to show how good they are at protecting the vulnerable and to avoid nasty questions about how they failed in their duty of care towards the staff and service users/patients by botching PPE deals, sending unvaccinated people out in to care homes and failing to provide back up when it swept through everyone in sight and generally running both sectors into the ground.

Pretzel1 · 01/02/2022 08:38

Good. I am vaccinated out if choice i didnt believe it was fair to force them or say you will lose your job otherwise i would expect this mandate to be applied to every individual in a job whether thats at the local carwash or shop. IMO i am vaccinated to protect myself. I dont see how my possible viral immunity will protect others, i can still pass it on regardless. I have still had covid even though i already had antibodies in my blood, albiet not as bad as some vaccinated + unvaccinated people. Still glad i got it as no one can be certain how severe they will have it but it was wrong to threaten people with job loss. I wonder if any unvaccinated members of parliament or ministers would be treated the same? Clearly not...

saygeronimo · 01/02/2022 08:49

@Pretzel1 as has been said many times, being vaccinated does help reduce spread, research has shown that to be true.
It doesn't stop it completely but it's factually incorrect to say that it doesn't. So it's extremely unhelpful to keep stating incorrect information.

TheScenicWay · 01/02/2022 09:14

Good. It should never have even been considered, let alone gone this far.
Yes, completely agree it has all been political. If it really was about health, where’s the advice about vitamin d and being healthy? Where’s the research and focus on early treatment of covid rather than prevention at all costs?

lightand · 01/02/2022 11:05

@Tealightsandd

And if you're vaccinated, it's to protect YOU.

Nope. It's both. Particularly important around vulnerable patients - some of whom, eg. those with blood cancer and other immunocompromised conditions, are less protected than other people by the vaccine.

Seriously the mind boggles. Why on earth would somebody who doesn't believe in or trust medicine and science want to work in... medicine and science?

Your last paragraph. Really? You cant think of any reasons at all? I am sure people could come up with 10 reasons at least.
Theluggage15 · 01/02/2022 11:16

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

leafyygreens · 01/02/2022 11:49

This again? @TheScenicWay

Where’s the research and focus on early treatment of covid rather than prevention at all costs?

A very basic search will show you just how much research and funding has been invested in this, such as trying to identify exisiting drugs that can be repurposed for early treatment.

www.principletrial.org/
www.recoverytrial.net/
www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/global-research-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov/solidarity-clinical-trial-for-covid-19-treatments

SantaClawsServiette · 01/02/2022 12:39

[quote leafyygreens]This again? @TheScenicWay

Where’s the research and focus on early treatment of covid rather than prevention at all costs?

A very basic search will show you just how much research and funding has been invested in this, such as trying to identify exisiting drugs that can be repurposed for early treatment.

www.principletrial.org/
www.recoverytrial.net/
www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/global-research-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov/solidarity-clinical-trial-for-covid-19-treatments[/quote]
But there has been little serious effort to get simple measures, like vitamin d levels, into the public mindset.

The focus has really been these kinds of very medicalized interventions, when for a lot of people, losing some weight and vitamin d levels would have gone a long way toward helping if it had been pushed on a wide basis. In fact with obesity it's been the opposite, we know that a lot of people have put on a lot of weight due to covid measures, including kids. How much extra money has been directed toward getting people outside and active?

TotalRhubarb · 01/02/2022 13:05

No great big profits to cream off from vitamin D supplements.

The mandate wasn’t about reducing risks to patients. If that were the government’s aim they would be mandating daily LFTs for all staff, including the vaccinated. It was about sending a message and manipulating society. Politics, in other words.

leafyygreens · 01/02/2022 13:10

But there has been little serious effort to get simple measures, like vitamin d levels, into the public mindset.

The focus has really been these kinds of very medicalized interventions, when for a lot of people, losing some weight and vitamin d levels would have gone a long way toward helping if it had been pushed on a wide basis.

There is no robust evidence vitamin D is effective in improving outcomes or preventing COVID. It's just the new ivermectin, HCQ etc.

Obesity is a public health crisis. It has been before the pandemic emerged. Huge amount of funding have been poured into tackling it, but it's a multifaceted, societal level problem which is incredibly difficult to prevent and treat.

No great big profits to cream off from vitamin D supplements.
No big profits to cream off dexamethasone, HCQ or any of the other candidates, but it didn't stop trials being run and those that showed efficacy being used as treatments.

TotalRhubarb · 01/02/2022 14:14

There is no robust evidence vitamin D is effective in improving outcomes or preventing COVID. It's just the new ivermectin, HCQ etc.

The evidence for vitamin D is patchy and it’s a pity more and better research hasn’t been done yet. Taken as a body, however, there’s a fair suggestion that adequate vitamin D could be protective. We definitely need more but it looks reasonably promising overall.

And here’s the thing. We know already that the UK population as a whole tends to be low in vit d, at least in Winter. We know that low vit d affects immunity in general, so it’s not a massive leap to think it could be a factor with Covid severity.

Most people in the Uk could do with (greater) supplementation and even those toward the bottom of the normal range could supplement and raise their levels but still fall within the ‘normal’ range, just higher up in it.

The risks of over-supplementing are longer-term and easy to mitigate - with a simple and cheap finger prick blood test you can check blood levels easily. Just as easy as a PCR or LFT.

It’s cheap and easy to take.

So what’s the downside, when we all need to supplement for our health in Winter anyway?

I do think lack of profits plays a part. There are only so many trials that can be done by non-profit making bodies such as universities.

I also think the lack of interest in vitamin d is part and parcel of the general lack of interest in nutrition and deficiencies we see in medicine and hence it becomes easy to dismiss interest in vit d as ‘the new Ivermectin’ rather than be open minded.

MummyPop00 · 01/02/2022 14:44

Correct decision, human rights > societal rights

leafyygreens · 01/02/2022 15:35

Taken as a body, however, there’s a fair suggestion that adequate vitamin D could be protective. We definitely need more but it looks reasonably promising overall.

This is untrue. There is currently no strong rationale for pushing funding into campaigning/prescribing vitamin D, given there is no robust evidence for efficacy, and therefore it could be better spent elsewhere.

hence it becomes easy to dismiss interest in vit d as ‘the new Ivermectin’ rather than be open minded.
Being open minded means conducting well powered, well designed RCTs, rather than pushing vitamin D based on insufficient evidence. This is exactly what is happening. Predictably, various groups are making spurious claims about vit D (and why it means no one needs to be vaccinated), exactly as they did with ivermectin and HCQ.

See Cochrane for a systematic review of the lit, with appropriate risk of bias assessments:
www.cochrane.org/CD015043/HAEMATOL_vitamin-d-effective-and-safe-treatment-covid-19

secular39 · 01/02/2022 15:35

@Sloughsabigplace

All this, “Well, I wouldn’t want to be treated by an anti vaxxer” - let me tell you, if you turn up in A&E after a horrific accident, or find out you have cancer and need urgent treatment, you won’t care if it’s a trained monkey treating you if they had the relevant qualifications.
Exactly!!!
ldontWanna · 01/02/2022 16:35

@SweetFelicityArkright

Considering the new rules mean no self isolation at all (and under the current ones you can go to work after 10 days despite still testing positive) it isn't really about risk or the vulnerable is it?

It's never been about protecting the vulnerable, it's been about politics. If it were about protecting the vulnerable then the NHS and social care would have enough staff and investment to care for patients and residents properly, and more to the point, there would have been a better plan in place for losing the social care workers they knew weren't vaccinated, other than paying providers yet more money and expecting the remaining staff to just pick up the slack, short changing residents on care and pocketing the money saved on short staffed shifts.
If it were about protecting the vulnerable then care workers wouldn't have been pressured into working when the isolation rules changed meaning that they had to work when living with a confirmed case, or put their jobs at risk.
If it were about protecting the vulnerable then there would still be different rules for HCPs and social care workers when isolation ends to prevent them working when they have covid and taking in to those vulnerable people.

It's been lip service by the government to show how good they are at protecting the vulnerable and to avoid nasty questions about how they failed in their duty of care towards the staff and service users/patients by botching PPE deals, sending unvaccinated people out in to care homes and failing to provide back up when it swept through everyone in sight and generally running both sectors into the ground.

Trust me... I know. Which is why it annoys me so much when the "vulnerable" argument gets thrown about simply to demonise people.
Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/02/2022 16:54

Well, so much for all the shouting about they'll NEVER reverse this

Realistically it was always going to happen, but I suppose they've persuaded a few more to get vaxxed on the back of it ...

ldontWanna · 01/02/2022 16:57

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Well, so much for all the shouting about they'll NEVER reverse this

Realistically it was always going to happen, but I suppose they've persuaded a few more to get vaxxed on the back of it ...

However, if you think of all the people that already lost their jobs or quit, all the staff involved in this shit show and the checks,paperwork ,meetings etc it's an absolute fucking disgrace and waste of money and staff.
MarshaBradyo · 01/02/2022 16:57

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Well, so much for all the shouting about they'll NEVER reverse this

Realistically it was always going to happen, but I suppose they've persuaded a few more to get vaxxed on the back of it ...

Yep

A fair few adamant it wouldn’t change

Swipe left for the next trending thread