![]() |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by OrangeMango
(Post 13093103)
I guess, they had to back down to keep the NHS from completely colapsing?
I think this statement is a bit suggestive. And it's hardly life saving, if un vaccinated medical staff are around, it may be, but it decreases the certainty. To me, an unvaccinated health worker, is something similar as one using a dirty needle to inject something life saving. It's only a ridiculous idea. I agree that it's irresponsible for healthcare staff not to be vaccinated. And you would think they would have learned about the principles of infectious disease during their training. |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Shard
(Post 13093108)
Yes, it would appear so.
I agree that it's irresponsible for healthcare staff not to be vaccinated. And you would think they would have learned about the principles of infectious disease during their training. |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13093118)
Eh? If the vaccines work and you are vaccinated, what does it matter that someone treating you isn't? If the person being treated is not vaccinated, they have made their decision and can hardly complain if another has made the same decision
|
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13093118)
Eh? If the vaccines work and you are vaccinated, what does it matter that someone treating you isn't?
Therefore you know that what matters in being treated by someone unvaccinated is the greater chance of them passing it to you and the possibility that as they are more likely to suffer ill effects if they do get covid, their actual treatment might be substandard and actually dangerous. We know you are not stupid. So what is your motivation behind such comments? |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Jerseygirl
(Post 13093122)
It does matter. Maybe the triple vaccinated patient is 80+, or has an underlaying health condition, or due to an health condition cannot be vaccinated. Even though they are vaccinated they could still get very ill, or worse, from Covid. Anyone who is vaccinated can still get the virus, but more importantly they can pass it on.
|
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13093124)
OK. So, if what you have stated is correct, how is the patient in your example to benefit from the vaccinated healthcare worker versus the unvaccinated healthcare worker? I would imagine that there is a requirement for all healthcare workers to be tested so as to show that they do not have it and, therefore, are at risk from passing it on.
|
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13093123)
From previous discussions it is clear you know that the unvaccinated are more likely to suffer ill effects from covid and more likely to pass it on.
Therefore you know that what matters in being treated by someone unvaccinated is the greater chance of them passing it to you and the possibility that as they are more likely to suffer ill effects if they do get covid, their actual treatment might be substandard and actually dangerous. We know you are not stupid. So what is your motivation behind such comments? It's to point out the hypocrisy of the vaccinated/unvaccinated debate. One assumes that all healthcare workers must be tested everyday. If they are not, I would ask: Why not? Being vaccinated does not mean that one cannot pass it on as has been demonstrated. If they are and everyone is clear, whether vaccinated or not, you will have to explain to me what the issue is. |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Jerseygirl
(Post 13093122)
It does matter. Maybe the triple vaccinated patient is 80+, or has an underlaying health condition, or due to an health condition cannot be vaccinated. Even though they are vaccinated they could still get very ill, or worse, from Covid. Anyone who is vaccinated can still get the virus, but more importantly they can pass it on.
​​​​ It's surprising that the basics of infectious disease are so hard for some to understand. |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Shard
(Post 13093140)
Thank you for explaining the obvious !
​​​​ It's surprising that the basics of infectious disease are so hard for some to understand. |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13093138)
You are putting words into my mouth. I have never stated that the unvaccinated are more likely to pass it on. If one is infected, one has the potential to pass it on..
One assumes that all healthcare workers must be tested everyday. If they are not, I would ask: Why not? Being vaccinated does not mean that one cannot pass it on as has been demonstrated. If they are and everyone is clear, whether vaccinated or not, you will have to explain to me what the issue is If you're treated by an unvaccinated person the chances of getting covid from them are, thus, higher than being treated by a vaccinated person. |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Shard
(Post 13093140)
Thank you for explaining the obvious !
​​​​ It's surprising that the basics of infectious disease are so hard for some to understand. |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Jerseygirl
(Post 13093142)
IMO it is not so much that they don’t understand, as they do not want to understand, It is no use arguing/debating with antivaxxers. May as well bang your head against a brick wall. :banghead:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Jerseygirl
(Post 13093142)
IMO it is not so much that they don’t understand, as they do not want to understand, It is no use arguing/debating with antivaxxers. May as well bang your head against a brick wall. :banghead:
If you accept that the vaccinated can pass on the virus, could you please explain to me why you believe that healthcare workers that are not vaccinated are more dangerous to their patients than those that have been vaccinated are? What danger do they present that a vaccinated one doesn't? |
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13093147)
It's precisely because I understand the basics that I have made the comments that I have made above. Please explain the issue to me, from your point of view, so that I can understand your position, in light of what I have stated above.
|
Re: Coronavirus
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13093146)
Nope. I have not put words into your mouth. I said you know of the facts mentioned.We have both talked about it, with references to back it up and I know the same thing has been said by others to you.
I believe they are screened every day. I imagine the resources needed for testing everyone every day might be problematic. The rapid kits are already in such short supply in places that people with symptoms are even discouraged (stay home and watch for symptoms) from trying to get them unless they are in an at risk group and it's more important to know. Yes, just as it has been demonstrated that the vaccinated are less likely to pass it on (infectious for a shorter period) and if they do pass it on, it's been shown that it's a lighter load. The issue is that an unvaccinated person who gets covid is infectious for longer and likely to pass on a higher covid load, than a vaccinated person who gets covid. There, that's twice. If you're treated by an unvaccinated person the chances of getting covid from them are, thus, higher than being treated by a vaccinated person. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 9:56 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.