Have you thought/realised?

antiquesam said:
So. If the government make vaccination compulsory, or physically stop you from doing something then that is a human rights issue, but if they provide guidance on ,say, wearing facemasks then that is a civil liberty issue. Have I got that right?
Click to expand...
Yes, in my mind that's sounds about right. I was reading the other day about the Australian practice of forced sterilisation of certain sections of the population, and thought that is a human rights issue rather than civil liberties. So in my mind if your decision of what happens to your body is taken away then it's a human rights issue.
If a person is jailed for a crime, that's civil liberties, but if they decide their kidney should go to a non criminal, then that would be human rights.
 
Compulsory seat belts, or compulsory face mask there is no difference you should have been fighting for lost rights a liberties years ago, You have long missed that bus.
 
In civilised societies there are laws/regulations which restrict our individual choices where there is significant benefit to our society. It could be argued that a compulsory vaccine would be a case in point where it indisputably an override on individual choice but highly desirable from a societal perspective.

I absolutely agree with the OP.
We can never vaccinate the whole population. Notwithstanding those who put individual choice above societal responsibility, there are those who cannot receive the vaccine for medical reasons. Factor in virus mutations and we are left with a situation similar to ‘flu which is a significant killer, except COVID seems to have a long term affect on a small, but significant proportion of fit under 60s. All amounts to another stretch on our already overstretched medical and care services; as a consequence we will also see an increase in death from other diseases like cancer due to lack of timely treatment.

Whilst the vaccine will hopefully alleviate the current unsustainably acute situation, I don’t see it getting us completely off the Coronavirus hook.
 
Compulsory vaccination to save the NHS. What next, illegal to smoke, eat red meat, not do any exercise, do too much exercise, do any contact sport, etc.

I also note that people in favour of either compulsory vaccination or the denial of freedoms to those that choose not to get vaccinated are in the cohort of those who benefit most from it.
 
Chrisinchip said:
except COVID seems to have a long term affect on a small, but significant proportion of fit under 60s.
Click to expand...

Nobody knows the long term effects on those that have had CV-19, I didn't know how it had (possibly) effected me until I had blood tests unrelated to CV-19, I think there will be a whole load of people finding out they are diabetic, or have heart disease in future years.
 
colinm said:
Nobody knows the long term effects on those that have had CV-19, I didn't know how it had (possibly) effected me until I had blood tests unrelated to CV-19, I think there will be a whole load of people finding out they are diabetic, or have heart disease in future years.
Click to expand...

Agree.

I have a very good friend who was more or less fighting fit at the start of last year.
Now she can barely function physically and might be lucky to have one 'normal-ish' day out of 14 when she feels a bit better - and that's only if she doesn't move out of a chair too much!

The impact on her has been shocking. :(
 
yorkslass said:
While we are thankful for the vaccine,, it only offers protection from getting serious symptoms. If it continues to mutate as quickly as it seems to be doing, i think the most vulnerable will have to be vaccinated every year ....just like many do with the flu vaccine.Let's hope that mass vaccination takes away the pressure from NHS staff, they cant be expected to carry on as they are forever.
Click to expand...

exactly sue.......if it keeps folk out of hospital...thats a BIG POSITIVE........hospitals will then be able to operate normally...
...CANCER PATIENTS will bne able to receive life threatening treatment.....along with all the other folk who are awaiting operations/treatment etc...
.....and as you state TAKE THE PRESSURE OF DOCS AND NURSES and others in NHS.....they have families to considered too....
..they are very brave working in the COVID WARDS......it must be a tremendous strain on them both physically and mentally........
.
 
mark61 said:
Compulsory vaccination to save the NHS. What next, illegal to smoke, eat red meat, not do any exercise, do too much exercise, do any contact sport, etc.

I also note that people in favour of either compulsory vaccination or the denial of freedoms to those that choose not to get vaccinated are in the cohort of those who benefit most from it.
Click to expand...
Haven't we already got to the position of the NHS denying treatment to smokers and the obese.
I'm not sure of who this cohort of pro and anti vaxxers that will benefit either way.
 
antiquesam said:
Haven't we already got to the position of the NHS denying treatment to smokers and the obese.
I'm not sure of who this cohort of pro and anti vaxxers that will benefit either way.
Click to expand...

Smokers and obese people are already being denied operations such as IVF, breast reconstructions and a new hip or knee in some parts of England. The medical magazine Pulse last month found that 25 of 91 primary care trusts (PCTs) had introduced treatment bans for those groups since April 2011.

NHS resources saved by those who do not help themselves. Everyone a winner!:)
 
Our friend had some massive growth in her face (non cancer.) They wouldn't even book her operation to have it removed until she lost weight.

This was 2019/early 2020 IIRC
 
With close on 30% of UK population classed as obese, this would drastically cut waiting times, but it's not the complete story.
IIRC a BMI of above 35 is considered a high risk of complications when using general anaesthetic, not 30 which is obese. Therefore patients over 35 BMI are asked to lose weight before any surgery.
 
colinm said:
With close on 30% of UK population classed as obese, this would drastically cut waiting times, but it's not the complete story.
IIRC a BMI of above 35 is considered a high risk of complications when using general anaesthetic, not 30 which is obese. Therefore patients over 35 BMI are asked to lose weight before any surgery.
Click to expand...

I was just really annoyed they wouldn't even book it. She still had a 2 month wait after loosing the weight. The target date would help a lot if people focus on the diet I would have thought.
 
st3v3 said:
I was just really annoyed they wouldn't even book it. She still had a 2 month wait after loosing the weight. The target date would help a lot if people focus on the diet I would have thought.
Click to expand...
With a lot of areas policy is 'you loose weight, then we book you in', for non life threatening conditions I see no problem with that. IMO it gives a big incentive to loose the weight, and NHS has enough problems with people not attending and cancelling operations without having to make and cancel for those who don't loose weight. N.B. this is only for those whose weight poses increased risks of complications from surgery.
p.s. a friend of mine was put on hip waiting list, but before an actual date for operation was set he had to be weighed to ensure he had lost weight, in this case the waiting list was around 6 to 8 months.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top