O/T. The Government's handling of Covid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

By immediately personalising my comment about teachers and by making a facile comment about the safety of NHS workers. It’s what you always do when you’re bored or have nothing relevant to add.

---

My comment about NHS workers was not facile. Statistically, during lockdown one, the mortality rate amongst NHS workers was below average of those in work - ie excluding the vast numbers in retirement or care homes, but amongst those exposed via their employment.

As stated this was because despite being in an exposed position, it was postulated that this was due to the more safe environment. That was perceived wisdom at the time.

Same with teachers where R59 observed about the possibility that there was not the exposure that some (indeed including you) believed there to be.

My comment, that you can makes stats say anything, is, if anything sympathetic to your position, suggesting that the low risk R59 spoke of may be just another bent statistic.

I will remember "words of one syllable" in future

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

My comment about NHS workers was not facile. Statistically, during lockdown one, the mortality rate amongst NHS workers was below average of those in work - ie excluding the vast numbers in retirement or care homes, but amongst those exposed via their employment.

As stated this was because despite being in an exposed position, it was postulated that this was due to the more safe environment. That was perceived wisdom at the time.

Same with teachers where R59 observed about the possibility that there was not the exposure that some (indeed including you) believed there to be.

My comment, that you can makes stats say anything, is, if anything sympathetic to your position, suggesting that the low risk R59 spoke of may be just another bent statistic.

I will remember "words of one syllable" in future

---

But as ever, when you’re wearing your daft pedant head, you just make mischief.

You already know why it is essential that front line workers such as those in hospitals and schools should be vaccinated and you already know the reason why their figures are not as bad as they might be...because they are two of the professions that take PPE as seriously as it should be taken...and yet still you pontificate making no worthwhile point whatsoever.

Earlier this week you and I agreed how ridiculous it was that 400 folk saw fit to hire a school for a wedding reception in North London.
Why? Because having such a number of people in the confines of a school provided an obvious breeding ground for the transmission of the virus.
Yet here you are now somehow querying that teachers - who regularly work in schools with a great deal more than 400 others, and who are, as I explained, these days often stuck in a single room with 25-30 other individuals - deserve to be vaccinated before schools are reopened.

If you genuinely don’t recognise that teachers and frontline NHS workers are amongst those who need priority vaccinations then you probably will require ‘words of one syllable in future’.

RA, technicallly I'd agree with you regarding teachers getting jabbed.
But to just compare that wedding with the class room was ridiculous.

Do you really think a full wedding bash with no PPE- hugging/kissing/dancing, compares with a segregated classroom?
:s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

But as ever, when you’re wearing your daft pedant head, you just make mischief.

You already know why it is essential that front line workers such as those in hospitals and schools should be vaccinated and you already know the reason why their figures are not as bad as they might be...because they are two of the professions that take PPE as seriously as it should be taken...and yet still you pontificate making no worthwhile point whatsoever.

Earlier this week you and I agreed how ridiculous it was that 400 folk saw fit to hire a school for a wedding reception in North London.
Why? Because having such a number of people in the confines of a school provided an obvious breeding ground for the transmission of the virus.
Yet here you are now somehow querying that teachers - who regularly work in schools with a great deal more than 400 others, and who are, as I explained, these days often stuck in a single room with 25-30 other individuals - deserve to be vaccinated before schools are reopened.

If you genuinely don’t recognise that teachers and frontline NHS workers are amongst those who need priority vaccinations then you probably will require ‘words of one syllable in future’.

---

I think you need to go back and read my first post and the one that preceded it again. it was not me that suggested that teachers were maybe not in as bad a scenario os you suggest. It was an ONS survey cited by R59. I merely added a further comment on some other questionable statistics id seen last year and posited that stats do not always represent "the truth"

I've got to agree with Ttr there RA, that was a really daft thing to say. It was 400 people freely mixing together in a hall, which happened to be in a school. That's no comparison to having a 'bubble' of 30 kids sitting at their desks, who have proven low susceptibility to the virus.

As I've said earlier, there is very little to be gained from teachers getting the vaccine. Let's say that a teacher gets vaccinated, it doesn't stop them passing it on to their family, who will then test positive, resulting in the teacher having to isolate anyway.

I agree that it will stop the teacher becoming very ill with the virus and maybe being off for some time, but this will be at the cost of a 18-64 year old vulnerable person, who is much likely to die from the disease.

So, you're saying that young fit healthy teachers in their 20s should have priority over vulnerable people in their 60s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ram59

I've got to agree with Ttr there RA, that was a really daft thing to say. It was 400 people freely mixing together in a hall, which happened to be in a school. That's no comparison to having a 'bubble' of 30 kids sitting at their desks, who have proven low susceptibility to the virus.

As I've said earlier, there is very little to be gained from teachers getting the vaccine. Let's say that a teacher gets vaccinated, it doesn't stop them passing it on to their family, who will then test positive, resulting in the teacher having to isolate anyway.

I agree that it will stop the teacher becoming very ill with the virus and maybe being off for some time, but this will be at the cost of a 18-64 year old vulnerable person, who is much likely to die from the disease.

So, you're saying that young fit healthy teachers in their 20s should have priority over vulnerable people in their 60s?

---

I accept part of that criticism in para 1, Ram...however where nursery schools and early year Juniors are concerned there maybe rather more in the way of intimate contact than you might imagine.
Also 25-30 pupils in a single classroom is probably not so different, in terms of all important personal space, from 400 in a school hall.
You are of course quite right that none of my lessons compared with the activities of wedding parties.

I think you’re missing the point as far as children’s ‘low susceptibility’ to the virus is concerned. That may be true and hopefully is...however there is a big difference between ‘susceptibility’ and ability to transmit. With the new (anything but British ;D) variant being more transmissible we have to be extra vigilant, not least where front line workers are concerned.

As regards para 3...heaven forfend that a teacher might ‘be off for some time’...a strange priority...but, imo, steps taken to prevent teachers ‘becoming very ill’ as a direct result of their employment conditions are worth taking and I don’t recall ever suggesting that teachers should take priority over ‘vulnerable’ people. I’m simply saying that, imo, if we want to have any chance of reopening schools in March then teachers should be amongst those given priority asap.

Finally, to partially reiterate, at no time have I ever said teachers, of any description, should have priority over ‘vulnerable people in their 60’s’ and please don’t put words in my mouth. What I have said is, as a hopefully fit and well person in my mid sixties, I believe that, if schools are to reopen, the needs of teachers are greater than my own.

P.S. Yesterday GP asked me to nail my colours to the mast over another issue. I answered honestly so I’ll now ask the same of you two...teachers and other front line workers to be prioritised as far a vaccination is concerned. Yes or No?

Please define the question more clearly. Should a 20 year old healthy key worker be prioritised ahead of a 70 year old, a 60 year old with immunity problems or what? I think the current setup based on susceptibility defined by age and health is fair. Priority to NHS and care (for aged) home workers is appropriate.

Within the broadly established heirarchy I have no problem with prioritising key workers within the bands eg a teacher in 40s should be prioritised ahead of an unemployed person in the same age bracket, unless the latter has an immunity or other significant heath issue.

Of course thats not really practical as there is probably no central record of individuals roles / jobs. And even if there is some clue from hmrc records, it won't distinguish key worker from non key. In practice it would take longer to try to reprioritise than leave it as is.

But if you want a simple yes/no, I'd say no. Within more clearly defined parameters I might say yes, sort of, but doubt practicability

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

I'm sorry, that's really a ridiculous question

Its perfectly possible for a white person to be racist against another white person, same as black on black, brown on brown. Some of the most racist people I have ever known and Indian against Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lanka etc

I honestly thought you had more intelligence than to suggest this. Skin colour and race are two totally different things.

---

Exactly, hoist by your own petard!

Because if I'd mentioned a race, then your accusation would have some substance, but I didn't! If I'm describing a bunch of people the same colour and indeed race as me in a negative way, but I haven't been racist towards them as I haven't used their race in a pejorative manner.

So you and AF are factually wrong and no doubt Thicky because although I can't read what he has posted, he has no doubt added his own *******s.

If I call you and AF thick white tw@ts, I'm not being racist, if I added a racial description (such as Irish for example assuming it applied to either of you) I would be.

Its kind of ironic, that you so desperate to have a pop at me and someone else had made the same comment to you, you'd be sneering at them for being "snowflakes" and being ultra sensitive.

Oh dear it seems in trying to be sharp and witty both you and AF have made yourselves look absolute fools.

Priceless! O:)

The thing is RA, is that you've suggested and there is a general call for teachers, to be vaccinated by the middle of February, which will be immediately after the over 70s group and before the over 60s which are to be followed by the vulnerable 16-64 year olds.

You may fit and healthy and I commend your personal attitude, but this doesn't give you or anyone else the right to push more vulnerable people back in the queue for young teachers, who are statistically very unlikely to be affected.

I hope that you stay safe RA, but just because you're fit and healthy, it doesn't mean that you're safe. Our founder and president of our walking football group was your age and fit and healthy, his funeral is next Thursday. It hit us players like a ton of bricks, because you believe that it only kills the obese, BAME, those with health problems, over 80s, etc. But no, it's brought home to me and the other 'lads', that nobody is safe. RIP Phil.

So, as well meaning as your thoughts are, is a few more weeks lost education, too bigger price to pay for many lives in the over 50s and those vulnerable younger ones?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

Yup he really cant help himself

---

I really would look up the definition of racist if I was you, because as before your completely and utterly wrong! Oh dear how silly can one be to repeat the same error more than once?