• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Omicron variant and the measures implemented in response to it

Status
Not open for further replies.

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,632
Location
First Class
I know a number of colleagues utterly frustrated with close relatives who have gone down the anti-vax /Covid-denial route, so perhaps it is an honest assessment of their feelings.

You can however choose to decline the vaccine without being an anti-vaxxer or covid denier.

Maybe the media would be interested in reporting my recent experience, the headline could be:

Unvaccinated couple both contract Covid, have a cold for three days….

You can’t deny that there’s a narrative in play here……
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,017
I know a number of colleagues utterly frustrated with close relatives who have gone down the anti-vax /Covid-denial route, so perhaps it is an honest assessment of their feelings.
Are:
Anti-vax,
Covid-denial, and
not yet having had the vaccine one and the same thing?

I don't go to church, does that automatically make me anti-religion or a god denier?

I voted one way or the other in the EU referendum. Does voting remain make you 100% in support of the EU come what may, and voting leave 100% anti-EU in every possible way?

No room in there at all for grey areas, middle ground, a bit of mild skepticism?
 

Dent

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2015
Messages
1,113
Whatever they say or think in private, which is entirely their business, it doesn't strike me as the right or respectful thing to do to express those frustrations to the media about someone who has just died.
Indeed. It is also disrespectful of the media to publish, and even actively promote, such sentiments.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
Imagine a disease that kills about 1.6m people a year die, and that is despite having a vaccination against it for decades. It is spread by people speaking, coughing, singing, etc. An R number has never been properly defined, but most studies have it around 1, but could be up to 4 in certain settings. The CFR is between 7 and 35%. Survivors can see a 20% increase of early mortality from other causes. On top of this, between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 people globally could have a latent infection of it. However, if it doesn't develop into a full infection then it won't transmit.

It sounds like a really grim form of COVID right? Actually this is tuberculosis, and is the second largest infectious disease killer in the world (after HIV). Now it's rates are rising again after years of decline due to all the funding and resources being diverted to COVID.

I don't recall any global meltdown to help TB control. And I certainly don't recall a mass testing regime to source the latent infections, as it is utterly pointless, as it is for COVID, and would probably paralyse the world. The key problem with Tb has been the expense of testing for it, yet all this money has been found for COVID (probably because it's something the first world has experienced and made a priority).

It's time we reprioritised and put COVID into proper perspective. Yes it was nasty and unknown at first , but omicron should be the normalisation of it. The testing of healthy people really needs to stop, along with the stigmatising of infected people with no symptoms. Then immediately efforts need to make sure our finite health and research resources are rediverted to the conditions that kill, maim and affect a lot more people.
I'd be careful what you ask for - I recall articles from 20-30 years ago bemoaning the low priority given to TB, and advocating much stronger public health responses, including testing.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,580
Location
London
Are:
Anti-vax,
Covid-denial, and
not yet having had the vaccine one and the same thing?

I don't go to church, does that automatically make me anti-religion or a god denier?

I voted one way or the other in the EU referendum. Does voting remain make you 100% in support of the EU come what may, and voting leave 100% anti-EU in every possible way?

No room in there at all for grey areas, middle ground, a bit of mild skepticism?

At what point did I suggest that? Of course there's a grey area and I don't think I suggested otherwise in fact I put "/" to highlight that.

Personally I'm not too sure how someone 18 months on hasn't had the vaccine isn't considered "anti-vax" (unless there is some fundamental underlying medical reason why they haven't), but that's my personal opinion.
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,017
I'd be careful what you ask for - I recall articles from 20-30 years ago bemoaning the low priority given to TB, and advocating much stronger public health responses, including testing.
Cull them, it's the only way to stop it spreading in an uncontrolled manner in the wild. :lol:
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
Are:
Anti-vax,
Covid-denial, and
not yet having had the vaccine one and the same thing?

I don't go to church, does that automatically make me anti-religion or a god denier?

I voted one way or the other in the EU referendum. Does voting remain make you 100% in support of the EU come what may, and voting leave 100% anti-EU in every possible way?
No room in there at all for grey areas, middle ground, a bit of mild skepticism?
No, anti vax, Covid denial and not having had the vaccine are not the same thing. They are three separate things, but where drawn as a Venn diagram, there is a very high degree of overlap - which with the combination of the political positions taken by many and the numbers who have accepted vaccines in countries like the UK is enough to make the casual elision far less unreasonable than your other comparisons.

Cull them, it's the only way to stop it spreading in an uncontrolled manner in the wild. :lol:
:lol:
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,632
Location
First Class
At what point did I suggest that? Of course there's a grey area and I don't think I suggested otherwise in fact I put "/" to highlight that.

Personally I'm not too sure how someone 18 months on hasn't had the vaccine isn't considered "anti-vax" (unless there is some fundamental underlying medical reason why they haven't), but that's my personal opinion.

Because an anti-vaxxer is ideologically opposed to all vaccines, and considers it their duty to dissuade others from being vaccinated against anything. How many people who’ve declined the Covid vaccine fit that description?

Having researched the subject to the best of my ability, I decided that as I’m low risk I’d rather benefit from the long(er?) lasting and broader protection offered by natural immunity, in the first instance at least. Statistically it was probably more risky I accept that, however the risk was so low as to be insignificant. Whilst you may disagree with my decision (as is your right of course) it was an informed choice, and certainly had nothing to do with lizards, 5G or microchips! ;)
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
39,024
Location
Yorks
To be honest, if I were the relatives in this instance, I wouldn't have a problem with mentioning that they hadn't been vaccinated. If it's of enough public interest to report the deaths of the two gentlemen (they were clearly well known in France), then so too are the circumstances surrounding their passing.
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,071
Personally I'm not too sure how someone 18 months on hasn't had the vaccine isn't considered "anti-vax" (unless there is some fundamental underlying medical reason why they haven't), but that's my personal opinion.
The vast majority of the benefit from vaccines is to the over 50s. If you're under 30 then it's entirely possible to believe that vaccines are safe, effective and absolutely vital in the fight against Covid, but not really worth the effort for you personally. If you define anti-vax in a way that takes in such a person then it unclear whether the word means anything useful at all.

It sounds like these twins weren't actually anti-vax, but had bought into some of the pre-2020 health propaganda that having a healthy lifestyle makes you invulnerable. It's sad when people believe in something which doesn't make a huge amount of difference, particularly when their age alone is enough to put them in a a vulnerable group. Ultimately though, I doubt you could have convinced them of anything by treating them as anti-vax. Sometimes you need to explain more about why what they are doing won't work, rather than explaining why something else will.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,632
Location
First Class
The vast majority of the benefit from vaccines is to the over 50s. If you're under 30 then it's entirely possible to believe that vaccines are safe, effective and absolutely vital in the fight against Covid, but not really worth the effort for you personally. If you define anti-vax in a way that takes in such a person then it unclear whether the word means anything useful at all.

It sounds like these twins weren't actually anti-vax, but had bought into some of the pre-2020 health propaganda that having a healthy lifestyle makes you invulnerable. It's sad when people believe in something which doesn't make a huge amount of difference, particularly when their age alone is enough to put them in a a vulnerable group. Ultimately though, I doubt you could have convinced them of anything by treating them as anti-vax. Sometimes you need to explain more about why what they are doing won't work, rather than explaining why something else will.

Good points, and just to be clear if I were 72 years old I’m 99.99% certain that I’d have been vaccinated.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,580
Location
London
Because an anti-vaxxer is ideologically opposed to all vaccines, and considers it their duty to dissuade others from being vaccinated against anything. How many people who’ve declined the Covid vaccine fit that description?

Having researched the subject to the best of my ability, I decided that as I’m low risk I’d rather benefit from the long(er?) lasting and broader protection offered by natural immunity, in the first instance at least. Statistically it was probably more risky I accept that, however the risk was so low as to be insignificant. Whilst you may disagree with my decision (as is your right of course) it was an informed choice, and certainly had nothing to do with lizards, 5G or microchips! ;)
The vast majority of the benefit from vaccines is to the over 50s. If you're under 30 then it's entirely possible to believe that vaccines are safe, effective and absolutely vital in the fight against Covid, but not really worth the effort for you personally. If you define anti-vax in a way that takes in such a person then it unclear whether the word means anything useful at all.

It sounds like these twins weren't actually anti-vax, but had bought into some of the pre-2020 health propaganda that having a healthy lifestyle makes you invulnerable. It's sad when people believe in something which doesn't make a huge amount of difference, particularly when their age alone is enough to put them in a a vulnerable group. Ultimately though, I doubt you could have convinced them of anything by treating them as anti-vax. Sometimes you need to explain more about why what they are doing won't work, rather than explaining why something else will.

That's one definition I suppose - for me it basically means "against vaccination" (in this sense against a Covid vaccine) which is what you have both described.
 

Merseysider

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
22 Jan 2014
Messages
5,402
Location
Birmingham
There's a Press Conference planned this afternoon with the classic trio of Johnson, Whitty and Vallance. What for isn't clear, but No.10 has said today as well that there's no data to suggest the need for further restrictions.
I watched it on Twitter. Was apprehensive earlier when it was announced but I was most pleased (and relieved!) to hear Bojo say that we can “ride out” this wave, in part “thanks to Omicron being less severe” without needing to “close the country”.

For the first and last time in my life, well done Boris! :lol:
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,045
Location
Taunton or Kent
Are:
Anti-vax,
Covid-denial, and
not yet having had the vaccine one and the same thing?

I don't go to church, does that automatically make me anti-religion or a god denier?

I voted one way or the other in the EU referendum. Does voting remain make you 100% in support of the EU come what may, and voting leave 100% anti-EU in every possible way?

No room in there at all for grey areas, middle ground, a bit of mild skepticism?
No, anti vax, Covid denial and not having had the vaccine are not the same thing. They are three separate things, but where drawn as a Venn diagram, there is a very high degree of overlap - which with the combination of the political positions taken by many and the numbers who have accepted vaccines in countries like the UK is enough to make the casual elision far less unreasonable than your other comparisons.


:lol:
These points of view are one end of the distribution curve. At the other end of the curve are zero-covid supporters, vaccine mandate supporters/fanatics, extreme lockdown supporters, etc. In the middle lies the overwhelming majority of the population who support and/or disagree with aspects of our covid response and vaccines, but hold no extreme point of view on anything.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
The vast majority of the benefit from vaccines is to the over 50s. If you're under 30 then it's entirely possible to believe that vaccines are safe, effective and absolutely vital in the fight against Covid, but not really worth the effort for you personally. If you define anti-vax in a way that takes in such a person then it unclear whether the word means anything useful at all.

It sounds like these twins weren't actually anti-vax, but had bought into some of the pre-2020 health propaganda that having a healthy lifestyle makes you invulnerable. It's sad when people believe in something which doesn't make a huge amount of difference, particularly when their age alone is enough to put them in a a vulnerable group. Ultimately though, I doubt you could have convinced them of anything by treating them as anti-vax. Sometimes you need to explain more about why what they are doing won't work, rather than explaining why something else will.
I largely agree with you on that, but with one caveat. There's a strand of belief in personal good living - right exercise, right food, etc. - that has a side effect of denial of the role of medicine in ensuring the individual's continued good health. That belief is one strand of the anti-vaxx movement, and seems to be at the heart of many of the tragedies where patients have asked for vaccination when already hospital in patients. If these twins, as reported, did express regret at not being vaccinated, that doesn't especially surprise me - it's been reported by a fair number of doctors, and seems associated with two dawning realisations - first, that the patient had made the wrong choice, and second that this decision couldn't be reversed.

I wouldn't call someone who'd made the choice not to bother taking a vaccine "anti-vaxx" - that would depend on more than just whether or not they'd taken the vaccine, and particularly their motives. But, having had to consider the data for my teenage kids (both now double vaccinated), I did look closely at the figures. Those figures, in the data from JCVI and before making any more general judgments, showed a definite net benefit for teenagers of being vaccinated over remaining unvaccinated. Given the relationship between age and risk of Covid, I would certainly question the judgement of such a person, and especially their view of risk/benefit analysis.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
7,089
This seems a strange comment, quite possibly a symptom of the unwelcome corruption of the English language that is all too commonplace these days. It's a modern thing for people to say they have flu when they actually just have a cold. If you have flu you're likely to be unable to get out of bed for a couple of days, and you certainly would feel ill.

Perhaps I should say I'm literally splitting my sides laughing at this - to use another inappropriate corruption of our language! ;)

I always wonder about the difference between cold and flu, and when it's actually one and when it's the other.

The thing I had at Christmas 1999 which kept me in bed from Christmas Eve to Boxing Day inclusive was almost certainly flu, the so called 'other millennium bug', but there have been other things I've had which seem much worse than a regular cold but didn't keep me in bed for even a day and didn't cause a loss of appetite - most recently in February 2019. That one felt noticeably more severe than a usual cold and came with significant fever, but I stayed up and ate relatively normally. I still thought of it as flu, though whether it was I can't be certain.

The only other times in my life I've been in bed with viral illnesses were when I was under 16 and my parents might have instructed me to do that as a precaution when it wasn't actually necessary. I had something in March 1984 when I remember being in bed for a long time, though whether I was actually that ill is an interesting question. I don't recall feeling that bad so possibly just parental concern.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
2,295
These points of view are one end of the distribution curve. At the other end of the curve are zero-covid supporters, vaccine mandate supporters/fanatics, extreme lockdown supporters, etc. In the middle lies the overwhelming majority of the population who support and/or disagree with aspects of our covid response and vaccines, but hold no extreme point of view on anything.
I agree, though I think the curve is skewed with more at the "anti-vaxx" end of the spectrum than in the zero-Covid camp. That opinion, entirely subjective, is based on the numbers of people who haven't taken vaccines, some assumptions about reasons and comparing them with the zero-Covid brigade who are highly concentrated in certain professions.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,632
Location
First Class
That's one definition I suppose - for me it basically means "against vaccination" (in this sense against a Covid vaccine) which is what you have both described.

So because I’m against open boarders does that make me xenophobic?

The widespread use of the term “anti-vaxxer” is just another example of the lowest common denominator being applied to those with a different view.

Pre-covid there was a clear and established definition of what anti-vax meant, unfortunately the term is meaningless now and I suspect is worn as a badge of honour by some people who aren’t anti-vaxxers at all!
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,411
Location
Ely
That's one definition I suppose - for me it basically means "against vaccination" (in this sense against a Covid vaccine) which is what you have both described.

I think the real problem now is that the term is effectively useless because it can mean so many things:

- Someone who opposes Covid vaccine mandates
- Someone who doesn't personally want a Covid vaccination based on their risk assessment, but has no desire to stop others doing so
- Someone who doesn't think the Covid vaccination should be taken by certain groups (eg. children) based on risk assessment
- Someone who doesn't think the Covid vaccination should be taken by anyone
- Someone who *actively* tries to prevent/dissuade people taking a Covid vaccination
- Someone who thinks most vaccines are ok but the Covid vaccine in particular is deeply problematic
- Someone who opposes any vaccine mandates
- Someone who thinks most or all vaccines that are currently deployed are deeply problematic, but has no desire to stop others taking them
- Someone who *actively* tries to prevent/dissuade people taking any vaccination
- Someone who thinks the concept of vaccination itself is rubbish
- Someone who thinks vaccines are evil and a scheme to kill or enslave the population

...and so on and so on. There's an incredibly wide range of opinions there, and many/most people probably agree with some of these statements and disagree with others.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,045
Location
Taunton or Kent
I agree, though I think the curve is skewed with more at the "anti-vaxx" end of the spectrum than in the zero-Covid camp. That opinion, entirely subjective, is based on the numbers of people who haven't taken vaccines, some assumptions about reasons and comparing them with the zero-Covid brigade who are highly concentrated in certain professions.
I don't know how much of the population supports zero-covid, but the anti-vax camp will be less than 10%: 90% of those eligible for at least 1 dose have one, and of the remaining 10% they will be split into those who can't get vaccinated for medical reasons, being hesitant about a relatively new vaccine, and blatant anti-vaxxers. Chances are that the latter group will be considerably smaller than 10% as a result. The only ones not eligible are those under 12, and many of them won't have a concept of being anti-vax.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,632
Location
First Class
I agree, though I think the curve is skewed with more at the "anti-vaxx" end of the spectrum than in the zero-Covid camp. That opinion, entirely subjective, is based on the numbers of people who haven't taken vaccines, some assumptions about reasons and comparing them with the zero-Covid brigade who are highly concentrated in certain professions.

I’m not so sure, a quick browse of social media will reveal zero-covid nutters from all walks of life, not all professionals and in some instances I suspect not employed at all!
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,017
No, anti vax, Covid denial and not having had the vaccine are not the same thing. They are three separate things, but where drawn as a Venn diagram, there is a very high degree of overlap - which with the combination of the political positions taken by many and the numbers who have accepted vaccines in countries like the UK is enough to make the casual elision far less unreasonable than your other comparisons.
I would love to see the evidence of that. I suspect there is an overlap but how much? No-one seems willing to put any actual survey results out there.

There was an article in the press before Christmas (The Guardian I think) reporting on research into the unvaccinated. It started off quite well, mentioning the expected reasons (ethnicity, religion, poverty, uncertainty, pregnancy worries etc) but also mention 'lack of access by public transport'. Unfortunately the article very quickly descended into an entirely predictable 'everyone who is not vaccinated must be a rabid anti-vaxxer', without giving any numbers for reasons why not vaccinated.

In France it was found that large numbers simply 'couldn't be bothered' or 'hadn't yet got round to it at that point in time' rather than 'outright refusal' - hence the stringent restrictions on liberty France introduced as a 'carrot' to jolly the un-vaccinated along a bit.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,580
Location
London
I think the real problem now is that the term is effectively useless because it can mean so many things:

- Someone who opposes Covid vaccine mandates
- Someone who doesn't personally want a Covid vaccination based on their risk assessment, but has no desire to stop others doing so
- Someone who doesn't think the Covid vaccination should be taken by certain groups (eg. children) based on risk assessment
- Someone who doesn't think the Covid vaccination should be taken by anyone
- Someone who *actively* tries to prevent/dissuade people taking a Covid vaccination
- Someone who thinks most vaccines are ok but the Covid vaccine in particular is deeply problematic
- Someone who opposes any vaccine mandates
- Someone who thinks most or all vaccines that are currently deployed are deeply problematic, but has no desire to stop others taking them
- Someone who *actively* tries to prevent/dissuade people taking any vaccination
- Someone who thinks the concept of vaccination itself is rubbish
- Someone who thinks vaccines are evil and a scheme to kill or enslave the population

...and so on and so on. There's an incredibly wide range of opinions there, and many/most people probably agree with some of these statements and disagree with others.

I would agree and therefore I don't think its anything to get too badly hung up on. As with anything, language evolves and people have different opinions. Therefore ask different people and they will believe that someone has to share all or just some of the beliefs in the list above to be considered "anti-vax".
 

Simon11

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2010
Messages
1,335
I watched it on Twitter. Was apprehensive earlier when it was announced but I was most pleased (and relieved!) to hear Bojo say that we can “ride out” this wave, in part “thanks to Omicron being less severe” without needing to “close the country”.

For the first and last time in my life, well done Boris! :lol:
His speech has been good until

Around 100,000 critical workers are set to take daily Covid tests in order to reduce the spread of the virus to colleagues, Boris Johnson has said.
It will be for key industries including food processing, transport and the border force, the prime minister said at a Downing Street briefing.
He will recommend England sticks with "Plan B" restrictions such as working from home where possible when Cabinet ministers meet on Wednesday, he added.

This could end up in disaster if key workers take daily tests, as this will only result in increased absences (where a good portion will be perfectly fine) and will heavily impact national services, which could harm the health of the nation.

I hope they have modeled [properly], the impact on both for and against this policy.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,580
Location
London
His speech has been good until



This could end up in disaster if key workers take daily tests, as this will only result in increased absences (where a good portion will be perfectly fine) and will heavily impact national services, which could harm the health of the nation.

I hope they have modeled [properly], the impact on both for and against this policy.

Doubt it - they don't seem to realise that you can test positive on a LFT for months after a Covid infection, which means the "test to release" on Day 6&7 is likely to never work.
 

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,071
Doubt it - they don't seem to realise that you can test positive on a LFT for months after a Covid infection, which means the "test to release" on Day 6&7 is likely to never work.
You can, but the vast majority of people don't
 

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
2,657
I'd be careful what you ask for - I recall articles from 20-30 years ago bemoaning the low priority given to TB, and advocating much stronger public health responses, including testing.
Sorry, I might not have been as clear as I meant to be - my point was that tb is suffering from the attention given to COVID and we should be reprioritising. But at the same time given how "background" TB is, despite being much more serious, the precedent is there to let COVID take a back seat in priorities.

I work in TB research, hence my "passion" for it. It is still underfunded and undertested.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top