Guilt Free Railing 9

[WouldBeGood]

Nine!!!

@TheGenealogist

To play devil's advocate, the EIS are just doing what experts like Devi whatsit have been doing.

They have ONE focus - to protect their teacher members. And yes, the absolute best way of protecting teachers would be to ensure either no children are in school, or all children are vaccinated. Just like Devi and her mates wanting to keep us all locked up for ever in pursuit of her sole aim of zero covid.

They aren't considering any other factor such as mental health, education, the economy, just putting forward one very narrow point of view.

However, you would think that a teaching union would also consider children's education, but obviously not.

I think this may be a little harsh. The thinking is probably more that vaccinating children would reduce the spread in schools - which would protect teachers and CV children or their families directly (even if they are vaccinated), but also reduce the risk of disruption to their education through teachers/ children being off because they are positive (though maybe not ill) or classes being off through contact with positive cases. Obviously, that could be solved through stopping the quarantining/ bubble system as they have done in England - but i don't think that's been confirmed in Scotland? (As i understand, double jagged people will still need a negative PCR test before they are let off quarantine in Scotland - which would still mean teachers being off for a few days if positive).

So the EIS could have a wider concern for children's education rather than just teacher welfare - and they consider that benefit to outweigh the risk of the vaccines to children. The JCVI don't seem to agree, though, and think the small but potentially serious vaccine risk to children isn't outweighed by overall benefits to them, or society.I'm not sure if they have expressly said, but the JCVI seem to think the "avoidance of disruption to education" aim can be achieved through stopping the quarantine/ bubbles for vaccinated adults and unvaccinated children - as England is doing.

While I'm tempted to trust the JCVI more than the EIS on the weighting given on vaccine harm vs risks to the population of unvaccinated children (if not educational benefit, necessarily) - it's obviously not up to me. The SG has not decided (as far as I know) that the "English" approach on quarantine/ bubbles will be followed, though the "not vaccinating children" advice will be followed. So the EIS has jumped on that to say they consider it to be the wrong decision - rather than saying that the SG needs to follow both parts or nothing to make education work next year...

[quote MaxNormal]**@Lockdownbear* and @runningpink* I'm someone who isn't desperately unwell but can't have the vaccines, or at least I don't feel I can risk it.

I had a bad reaction - was badly injured, really - by a completely unrelated medication, an antibiotic, a few years ago. Damaged my tendons, ligaments, nervous system, ears... was a bit of a mess. I was really unwell for a while, particularly with the nervous system stuff. I'm now doing much better but it is a chronic condition for that I will have for the rest of my life and I do live with some issues day to day, but nothing like the hell and horror of when I was really bad.

The other thing that it unfortunately did to me, and which many others in my support group struggle with, is that I no longer tolerate many medications that I was previously absolutely fine with. They seem to somehow re-injure me and, worst case, put me back in that state of acute illness that I had initially.

So no painkillers. Antibiotics I would only take for life-threatenig infections. And I don't even want to think about what would happen if I needed for example cancer treatment.
I actually begged my dentist to take my cracked tooth root out with no anaesthetic. She didn't, but she used a modified technique to use a fraction of the normal amount, an injection directly into the tooth tendon. And I still reacted badly.

Having said all this, none of my health issues are those that put me at additional risk of covid, and in fact I probably had it right at the start after travelling on a ferry full of ski trippers returning from Italy.
So in my case getting the vaccine would be literally insane. I'd be risking huge complications for something that isn't remotely a serious illness for me.
Apart from the unpleasantness of a relase, which is deeply traumatic, there's the logistical issue. I have a DH who travels for work and when I'm really bad I'm in no state to be alone. We already lost so much money at the start of lockdown.

I'm vanishingly unlikely to darken the doors of a nightclub but I'm very concerned indeed about mission creep, and extremely concerned about travel.

I can only hope that my consultant supports me on this in terms of agreeing that I should be exempted, but who knows.
So yeah.... fun times, really.

Sorry to dump all of this on a thread that I really just lurk on sporadically but after yesterday's announcement I just wanted to raise a bit of awareness about why some people may have very good reasons not to take the vaccine but at the same time might not be desperately unwell otherwise.[/quote]
This sounds awful max . I do think there is an assumption that anyone who can't (as opposed to not wanting to) have the vaccine would be vulnerable anyway, so wouldn't want to travel, go to crowded indoor spaces or anything - so won't really be put out by vaccine passports. But that does forget about people like you - who could otherwise live a 'normal" life but will be really disadvantaged by the whole thing.

Being unable to have the vaccine must be horrible max. What difficult times these are.

I got dutifully vaccinated on the basis that I was promised that was the way to freedom. Instead we have more restrictions than last summer and no sign of an end. I feel properly duped.

"The SG has not decided (as far as I know) that the "English" approach on quarantine/ bubbles will be followed, though the "not vaccinating children" advice will be followed. So the EIS has jumped on that to say they consider it to be the wrong decision - rather than saying that the SG needs to follow both parts or nothing to make education work next year..."

That's a fair point @ResilienceWanker, they can't have it both ways unless we're going to have another year (or who knows how long frankly) of burst bubbles and random isolations disrupting education and social development. From NS's previous statements I think they were expecting the vaccine to be approved for all teenagers, but now that it hasn't they either have to go against expert advice (and the JCVI really are the experts when it comes to vaccine use, not Devi and Deepti) or follow England (and Wales?) and abolish the bubbles and the need for contact isolation from now on. Of course, that's assuming they take the view that education can't be disrupted any further and start from there, rather than start from we must keep cases under control at all costs . I have an awful feeling their priority might be the latter.

And WTAF is this? Nicola Sturgeon trying to strong arm the JCVI into 'keeping the matter under review'. Does she not think that perhaps the JCVI is also aware that some other countries are giving it to teenagers (plenty aren't) and are already watching the data? They've explicitly said they are! FFS, a politician has no business interfering in scientific committees because they didn't give her the advice she wanted. Makes me wonder if a similar approach has been taken all the time she's said she's asked her advisors to reconsider the evidence on x/y/z (in other words, I want to do something else and need cover).

@groovee

It is possible for young people to get the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

My 19 year old son received his first Astra Zeneca vaccine yesterday.

He's sensitive to PEG which is an ingredient in the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines. He just had to ask and they didn't argue nor requested evidence.

He's now in bed with a high temperature/aches/cough etc feeling rubbish😢

@WouldBeGood

I got dutifully vaccinated on the basis that I was promised that was the way to freedom. Instead we have more restrictions than last summer and no sign of an end. I feel properly duped.

I agree. I'm also a bit pissed off at the moving of the goalposts. First it was vaccinate the vulnerable (fair enough), then make sure all adults have their first jab, then double vaccinate as many people as possible before relaxing anything (again, given delta, it seems that may not be a ridiculous aim). But now it's moved to - children still aren't vaccinated, or not everyone can be vaccinated so we still need protections, or the elderly haven't had their booster yet...

I appreciate things change in terms of variants and so on, but it does seem that there is a tendency to kick the can down the road, whereas BoJo for all his faults has decided to put his money where his mouth is and trust the vaccine will do its stuff for the vast majority of people. I'm just not sure the SG is ready to make that leap. As youcannot says, SG still seem to have in the back of their mind "we need to keep cases as low as possible" rather than "cases will rise, but that's OK and it's the only way we can ensure education can go ahead" (or whatever other critical things they need to get back to normal and keep there). It is quite frustrating. And I am a bit worried that we're just storing up issues for the winter so we can't be normal then, so realistically, it'll be next March or April we get another chance. Which is obviously too late for ANOTHER year of toddlers/ school pupils/ students/ aged relatives/ cancer patients or whoever.

@Aurea from the zoe app studies more people get a reaction with the first dose of AZ then Pfizer but it shows that his body is rapidly creating antibodies. Its not very nice though! Hope he feels better soon loads and loads of water as well as paracetamol and Ibruprofen! Most friends were a day or two feeling rubbish.

@Y0uCann0tBeSer10us I could honestly scream every time NS spouts that long covid is a reason for x y or z when Scotland is 16 months and counting behind on treating long covid sufferers!

How is writing a letter 'strong arming'? Bit dramatic.

It's obvious her preference would be for teenagers to be vaccinated, as many leaders around the world have decided to do. The CMO continuing to communicate that to the JCVI is just consistency as far as I can tell.

Actually I've just remembered I saw someone from the JCVI being interviewed about this last night, and he basically said the issue is that they haven't collected enough data yet - which implies that a different decision may well be made in due course.

It's hardly a strong arm tactic to send a letter saying 'please keep on collecting data, we'd support a change in policy should the data support it'.

@Y0uCann0tBeSer10us

And WTAF is this? Nicola Sturgeon trying to strong arm the JCVI into 'keeping the matter under review'. Does she not think that perhaps the JCVI is also aware that some other countries are giving it to teenagers (plenty aren't) and are already watching the data? They've explicitly said they are! FFS, a politician has no business interfering in scientific committees because they didn't give her the advice she wanted. Makes me wonder if a similar approach has been taken all the time she's said she's asked her advisors to reconsider the evidence on x/y/z (in other words, I want to do something else and need cover).

Well, I'm sure they'd just consider it a closed book without being telt. I know the SG are allowed to write to whoever they want to, but it does come across as a bit arrogant to try to teach them their job, and say, effectively "hmmm, we're not sure you've got this right. Can you have another look, please". And, yes, I'm sure the JCVI are quite aware of long covid, thank you NS .

I think your last sentence is very true too. The SG are experts at policy based evidence making in all sorts of areas .

@IncludeWomenInThePrequel my point was that the first minister has no business publicly declaring that they are 'urging' the JCVI to keep the matter under review and implying that they've made the wrong choice and that she knows better. As you say, they have made it clear themselves that they have safety concerns and want more evidence. The optics matter here - the JCVI has to be seen to be completely impartial for the public to have any faith in it, and Ministers from all sides should just let them get on with it and respect their expertise in this matter. If Boris was broadcasting that he was 'urging' an advisory committee to do something (which can be seen as strong arming) I'd be equally critical.

She's not urging them to do anything except their job though. She's not saying 'I urge them to change their minds' she's saying 'I urge them to keep it under review'.

By saying anything at all, she's implying that they have made the wrong choice. It's undermining!

I disagree. I think a great many people will be disappointed by their decision, and be pleased to see a leader who is prepared to put plans into place quickly if/when the data supports a change.

@IncludeWomenInThePrequel

She's not urging them to do anything except their job though. She's not saying 'I urge them to change their minds' she's saying 'I urge them to keep it under review'.

Hmmm I see it as she is making it public because she disagrees with the outcome.

She doesn't need to urge a scientific body who review data and vaccination implications to keep it under review they do it anyway they are professional experts they don't need to be urged to do their jobs!

More like it goes against a plan SG had concocted about schools and isolations and she doesn't like it!

The JCVI are right IMO, Pfizer in some cases especially young males can cause heart inflammation and its currently unknown if this risk increases as age decreases. There is also the very big moral dilemma of vaccinating children when global population of adults still have a high death rate.

Well yes, she's clearly in disagreement with the outcome. I can't really fathom why it's such an issue though. She can disagree all she wants, and send letters representing those views if she like, but she actually has no sway here.

I think @Y0uCann0tBeSer10us hit the nail on the head of why it's a issue it's undermining a scientific body from a politician. One who has stated all along they will be driven by data and science but the scientists have said not enough data and she doesn't like it!

"I am acutely aware that some countries are vaccinating younger teenagers and I certainly consider it to be extremely important that this is not ruled out here. So to that end, the chief medical officer is writing to the JCVI asking that the benefit of vaccinating all 12-17 year olds is kept under close and ongoing review and that it takes account of all available data from countries already doing this."

I accept that you don't agree, but the above is verbatim from her address today. Note the use of "I" and "So to that end" making it clear that this is on her instruction. Also "kept under close and ongoing review" and "takes account of all available data" which strongly indicates that not all available data was taken into account. In this statement, to my ears, she is clearly implying that the JCVI has not considered everything and that they made the wrong choice. I don't believe either of those things to be true, and I don't think leaders should be implying it is (and undermining confidence in independent committees) because they, despite not being remotely qualified to comment, happen to disagree.

I would have thought it was extremely obvious that any/all leaders will be ready to change should that advice change, given how successful the vaccination roll out has been to date.

[quote Aurea]@groovee

It is possible for young people to get the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

My 19 year old son received his first Astra Zeneca vaccine yesterday.

He's sensitive to PEG which is an ingredient in the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines. He just had to ask and they didn't argue nor requested evidence.

He's now in bed with a high temperature/aches/cough etc feeling rubbish😢[/quote]
Because of her health she can't have AstraZeneca either due to the blood clots issue.

So it's waiting on the consultants deciding if moderna will be an option or if she will be unvaccinated.

Yeah I totally don't read into it what you do, tbh

Yes. She said "The Scottish government has always followed the advice of the JCVI, and for good reason." But then proceeds to indicate that, really, she would have preferred the advice to be different. Fair enough.

But it is only advice. So if she really, really thought vaccinating children was the way forward, Scotland could go against the advice and do the vaccination. But I don't think anyone thinks that would be a good idea politically, given the emphasis she has put on "following the science", and how much she wants to be seen to be taking advice of experts.

So the only sway she has is to make political statements that she would rather do something else but is being held back by the nasty westminster scientists UK-government-backed-JCVI so she is off the hook from doing something risky and widely not seen as a good idea, but would get her some popular support. It's pretty standard, surely.

You think she wants off the hook from doing it? Because she's hinting she wished she could do it?
And she's glad they didn't recommend it because the JCVI is 'UK government backed' despite her always being in support of them until now?
And to make that clear to everyone she's obliquely saying 'I hope they change their minds'?
And this is evidence of her thinking some scientists are nasty because they work in England? Multiple on that point especially.

Fuck me.

How did you tie yourself into that absolute pretzel of a knot?!

It’s cos she’s in the thrall of mad kiddie vaxxer Devi