Indeed, I'll remember to avoid them..The BBC do love to him and his firm a lot of free publicity. I wouldn't particularly take any notice of what he's got to say on anything - it'll probably never come to anything
Indeed, I'll remember to avoid them..The BBC do love to him and his firm a lot of free publicity. I wouldn't particularly take any notice of what he's got to say on anything - it'll probably never come to anything
Pimlico Plumbers have form for this and will continue to use the argument that their plumbers are self employed rather than workers, meaning they don't benefit from the protection of disability discrimination law in employment.Presumably it could also be very easily challenged in courts
The Claimant believed that he was self-employed. He had his own accountant, was VAT registered and paid a salary to his wife for performing administrative duties. Following a heart attack and period of pro-longed absence, the Claimant’s agreement was terminated by the Respondent.
The Claimant felt this was unfair and initiated unfair dismissal and entitlement to holiday pay and sick pay claims against the Respondent. He also lodged a direct disability claims against the Respondent and its Chief Executive, Charlie Mullins.
Great. Just watch the legions begin to argue that we should just let infection run rife through communities or pass the jab because they’ve had COVID already...
How is the existence of the immune system "news"? This has been known about for centuries.
Absolutely not. When will people get it into their heads that this is not just about the vulnerable picking up the virus? That’s only part of the manoeuvre. The NHS is in dire straits right now and the virus is having a big impact on those under the age of 65 - the NHS has said that above a quarter of hospital admissions are those under 65. If we just continue to shield the vulnerable, as we have been, we will always end up in this situation. Vaccine is needed to reduce disease severity in all age groups so that the NHS can cope with future demand.I think further evidence is required before we reach conclusions, but if this is actually the case surely it strengthens the argument for vaccinating the most vulnerable and then lifting most if not all restrictions? Restrictions come with a significant (and I don’t only mean monetary) cost remember. When the cost is so high we must not subscribe to a dogmatic belief that only vaccines can save us, not if/when there is evidence to the contrary.
So as a NHS worker I can get vaccinated and have booked a slot, but what does seem slightly counterintuitive at the moment is they are actually now vaccinating in a council owned building literally next door to my house but instead I'm having to do a 60 mile round trip to my workplace instead (twice to receive both doses)
There are a lot of colleagues in the same position, who live miles away from the main hospital site and are of course working from home at the moment (this is support staff not medical of course), I think the record at the moment is a colleague that got married recently and moved 80 miles away (160 mile round trip)! Obviously they don't visit the hospital site too much even without a pandemic!
What is the current officially pronounced state of play regarding the matter of pharmacies and Covid-19 vaccine injections. These pharmacies have been injecting flu vaccine for quite some time now. I understand the large Boots group in particular feel they can administer a large number of the Covid-19 vaccine injections.
On a personal level, both my good lady wife (79) and I (75) received the first of our Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine injections a few days ago. My wife qualifies as she suffers from Vascular Dementia and I appear to have qualified as she lives at home with me and I am her accredited carer. We were notified that we would be recalled in 10-12 weeks for the second injections.
Absolutely not. When will people get it into their heads that this is not just about the vulnerable picking up the virus? That’s only part of the manoeuvre. The NHS is in dire straits right now and the virus is having a big impact on those under the age of 65 - the NHS has said that above a quarter of hospital admissions are those under 65. If we just continue to shield the vulnerable, as we have been, we will always end up in this situation. Vaccine is needed to reduce disease severity in all age groups so that the NHS can cope with future demand.
Failed to prepare, or was already operating on very fine margins?We won’t always end up in this position though, that’s the point. We’ll have herd immunity. Don’t forget that the NHS is operating with reduced capacity in effect, partly as a result of social distancing on wards but largely due to so many front line staff having to self isolate. This was always going to be a bad winter for obvious reasons and yet the NHS failed to prepare. Saying that over a quarter of hospital admissions are aged under 65 means very little. There are plenty of vulnerable people in this group and it’s easy to play the percentage game by simply not admitting those over 65 (or over 70, 75, 80 etc.).
Absolutely not. When will people get it into their heads that this is not just about the vulnerable picking up the virus? That’s only part of the manoeuvre. The NHS is in dire straits right now and the virus is having a big impact on those under the age of 65 - the NHS has said that above a quarter of hospital admissions are those under 65. If we just continue to shield the vulnerable, as we have been, we will always end up in this situation. Vaccine is needed to reduce disease severity in all age groups so that the NHS can cope with future demand.
Failed to prepare, or was already operating on very fine margins?
That's an argument for carrying precautions forward for a while, such as social distancing, face coverings indoors etc.
To my mind, it doesn't justify months on end of lockdown.
The reality is we’re nearly a year in now and we know how the virus behaves.
Does that statement above above assume that all variations that are evolving of the virus have to be dealt with by the same medication?
Indeed, there seem to be people who are amazed that this respiratory virus behaves much like other respiratory viruses.No I wasn’t referring to how future strains may respond to pharmaceutical interventions; that we don’t know. We do however know that the virus behaves seasonally, and whilst this may appear obvious now, there was little if any recognition of this last year until it was too late.
My 100-year old father in law is cared for in a residential home not far away. They have managed to keep the virus out of the home despite a couple of positive tests amongst the staff. They have just had their second promised date for vaccination cancelled, reportedly because the local GP service has failed to get the promised delivery. The staff are really worried that the variant virus will get there first, after all their efforts.
Is the delay in vaccinating care homes a one-off problem in our area or is it (as I fear) a result of supplies being prioritised to the government-run super-hubs so that Boris's promises on numbers can be delivered? Any evidence from elsewhere would be appreciated. (I have read the government's vaccination plan which says that all care homes will be done by end January, but I never underestimate their ability to cock things up).
Until people are vaccinated, yes, we will. Can you imagine if we continued at the rate currently? This is with the supposed five months protection previous COVID infection gives. Vaccination is the only viable way to reduce the severity of the disease and stopping the mass hospitalisation leading to the situation we see currently.We won’t always end up in this position though, that’s the point. We’ll have herd immunity. Don’t forget that the NHS is operating with reduced capacity in effect, partly as a result of social distancing on wards but largely due to so many front line staff having to self isolate. This was always going to be a bad winter for obvious reasons and yet the NHS failed to prepare. Saying that over a quarter of hospital admissions are aged under 65 means very little. There are plenty of vulnerable people in this group and it’s easy to play the percentage game by simply not admitting those over 65 (or over 70, 75, 80 etc.).
Undoubtedly both! There’s no denying the latter but that’s all the more reason to make preparations. It appears that senior management have acted like rabbits in headlights since last summer.
Could you provide some evidence to back up your assertion please?Until people are vaccinated, yes, we will. Can you imagine if we continued at the rate currently? This is with the supposed five months protection previous COVID infection gives. Vaccination is the only viable way to reduce the severity of the disease and stopping the mass hospitalisation leading to the situation we see currently.
Until people are vaccinated, yes, we will. Can you imagine if we continued at the rate currently? This is with the supposed five months protection previous COVID infection gives. Vaccination is the only viable way to reduce the severity of the disease and stopping the mass hospitalisation leading to the situation we see currently.
Undoubtedly both! There’s no denying the latter but that’s all the more reason to make preparations. It appears that senior management have acted like rabbits in headlights since last summer.
To (somewhat) defend them, there's only so much that can be done to make preparations - staff generally can't be magic-ed up out of thin air for example. It's quite clear though that they are doing what they can to make preparations, for example if you look at ICU capacity in London* you can see that they've somehow managed to good as double the ICU capacity (as of 10/1) to try and match demand (AIUI at the expense of general & acute beds hence cancellations to pretty much everything else) so to accuse the NHS of doing nothing isn't quite right.
View attachment 88679
*in response to an earlier post about why the FT was only using London graphs for ICU beds, I realise now it's because the other NHS regions have been fairly inconsistent over the previous few years - for example in 17/18 there were 4 regions (London, North, South, and Midlands & East) to the 7 this year (London, Midlands, East of England, North West, NE & Yorks, South East and South West)
I honestly believe the virus will become endemic
and we’ll learn to live with and tolerate it as we do with flu.
That’s fair enough, the frustration among front line staff doesn’t appear to relate to ICU bed numbers though. There seems to be a lot of red tape preventing people with transferable skills being utilised fully for example, it’s anecdotal evidence but when there is so much of it I’m not sure it can be dismissed.
But not this - it would require humility and acceptance that we are sometimes wrong about the best course of action. I don't think that's likely to be something our politicians or chief scientists are likely to do any time soon (they lack the humility). I wish you were right, but I doubt it.
Assuming nothing bad happens over this mess with Scotland screaming to the world about how many vaccines we have, they hope to dramatically exceed the two million per week target by the end of February.If that carries on they've met the the 2 million a week target.
Assuming nothing bad happens over this mess with Scotland screaming to the world about how many vaccines we have, they hope to dramatically exceed the two million per week target by the end of February.
European countries, including the UK, are set to receive fewer vaccines than expected from Pfizer starting next week, according to the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, further complicating the slow rollout of inoculations across the continent.
Geir Bukholm, director of infection control at NIPH, said the US pharmaceutical company told Norway on Friday morning that it would receive 18 per cent fewer doses than expected next week.
He added that the temporary reduction would affect all European countries as Pfizer reorganises its production in order to increase its capacity this year from 1.3bn doses to 2bn.
As it said it was working to deliver more doses than originally planned this year, Pfizer warned estimated volumes of coronavirus vaccine doses delivered to each country in a given quarter “may need to be adjusted”.
It confirmed that an increase in manufacturing meant modifications to the process were necessary and that these required additional regulatory approvals.
“Although this will temporarily impact shipments in late January to early February, it will provide a significant increase in doses available for patients in late February and March,” it said.
As a result, it said there may be fluctuations in orders and shipping schedules at its Belgian facility of Puurs in the immediate future.
Supply to the UK, which comes from the same plant, would also see fluctuations, Pfizer said.
Norway, which will now receive 36,075 doses next week instead of the 43,875 it had been expecting, said it did not know how long it would take Pfizer to get back to maximum capacity.
The Scandinavian country, like several other European countries, has been keeping a stockpile of doses in case there were problems with deliveries and said it would now draw from this emergency pool of vaccines. Mr Bukholm said Norway had enough to cover “a few weeks ahead” if needed.