As much as some state leaders are attempting to stop the move to mandatory Covid vaccination for hospital workers (and for employees in other sectors), close to 25% of U.S. hospitals are requiring their staff to get ‘jabbed’ as a condition of employment. More than 96% of doctors have already been vaccinated, according to the American Medical Association, and 45% of those who have not plan to be. MailOnline has the story.
According to the American Hospital Association (AHA), around 1,500 hospitals have set vaccine mandates, reported CNN.
The vaccine requirements are controversial and have received backlash from employees, unions and even some governments.
Federally, it is legal for employers to demand their staff to get vaccinated, though individual states can – and have – passed laws banning vaccine mandates in the workplace.
The first major hospital system to institute this type of mandate was Houston Methodist Hospital system in Texas.
The hospital’s decision was met with backlash from employees, and 117 filed a joint lawsuit against the hospital.
Their effort was in vain with the lawsuit thrown out and more than 100 employees were either fired or resigned.
NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, in New York City, also set a similar mandate, giving all of its employees until September 1st to get the shots or be terminated. …
These types of mandates are not legal everywhere, however.
In seven states, Arizona, Arkansas, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Tennessee and Utah, employers are not allowed to force their employees to get the vaccine to keep their jobs.
Advocates of mandatory vaccination for hospital workers employ the usual trick of comparing Covid to other viruses such as polio and smallpox.
“I cannot imagine passing any worse law than [banning vaccine mandates],” John Goodnow, CEO of Benefis Health in Great Falls, Montana, told CNN.
“Imagine if that would have been passed back when we were fighting polio, or smallpox before that.”
Benefis attempted to put a vaccine mandate in place in April, but its attempt was blocked by state legislators.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
We need to end all coercion
Biotech Exec Mother Who Refuses To Vaccinate Her Child Has Custody Removed
https://rumble.com/vku0j2-biotech-exec-mother-who-refuses-to-vaccinate-her-child-has-custody-removed.html
Stand in South Hill Park Bracknell every Sunday from 10am meet fellow anti lockdown freedom lovers, keep yourself sane, make new friends and have a laugh.
Join our Stand in the Park – Bracknell – Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
I’ve been grown and educated that British adore Freedom. There is no other explanation for opposing National Socialism.
Destroy these traitors of ours ideals.
Regrettably so many of the British seem to relish tyranny, all those foul snitches who betrayed others for exercising their rights to fresh air would be one of the best examples. Other countires seem to have a much larger and more organised opposition to tyranny than we do.
More than 96% of doctors have already been vaccinated, according to the American Medical Association, and 45% of those who have not plan to be
Very difficult to give this report any credence whatsoever given that states like Iowa, South Dakota, South Carolina, Idaho, Alaska, Florida, Oklahoma and Utah have no mandates for jabs or masks.
The daily mail took a real nose dive recently regarding this plandemic. I read somewhere their was a new directive to avoid that “antivax’ stuff.
Sad really, it once had some independence occasionally.
Nothing left now.
Probably got a cash injection from Bill Gates. Bill’s cash makes sure that the Guardian is rabidly pro vax.
Most of the media has thoughout this crisis (a crisis of government not a crisis of disease) been getting >50% funding from running government propaganda ads. No wonder so much of it is corrupt.
That’s a depressing number if true.
In my country there is a saying that ‘Lie has short legs’.
I know quite a few medics in the USA who declined.
Off topic….
Reform UK have been silened by big tech firms and now Metro Bank have closed their account without warning or reason.
Clearly Reform UK are saying things the establishment don’t like. That’s good news.
The bad news is the government are getting away with applying pressure to banks to have said banks attack the Reform Party, at least when China forced HSBC to attack independence group’s accounts the worldwide media condemned it. Here in the “people’s” republic of britain the only source talking about the attacks on Reform is Reform themselves plus a few allies.
Looking at Zoe, ‘cases’ have started to rise again.
I heavily suspect we are looking at 2 curves overlain
curve 1 = normal people, pretty much summer + herd immunity
curve 2 = youngsters clubbing again – covid will be going through them like shit through a goose – they won’t even notice
I suspect it will be on the way down again soon
Increase in positive tests are amongst the younger age group who have recently been included in the vaccine programme, exactly the same increase in cases amongst the recently vaccinated groups previously. Expect an increase in the under 20s positive test rate in the next week or two….
The Spectator Covid Tracker | The Spectator
yes, that’s also true. and we seem to have seen it everywhere the vaccine rolled out – a spike in cases in that group. Gibraltar being the stand out case.
That Zoe guy is a fraud………started off alright, but in the past 2-3 months he has morphed into a government mood-setter.
Expect more doom, gloom and calls for caution in the weeks ahead as the government wants its emergency powers extended until next March.
Wonder when Toby & co. will get around to remarking upon the fact that we have been ruled by this Johnson Junta for over 500 days?
I think he was good at the beginning. he was less keen on lockdowns but actually agreed with them in principle.
then he got his new funding and started going on about getting kids jabbed
Looking at Zoe, ‘cases’ have started to rise again.
I can’t see that on the Zoe website – but I can only see the smoothed graph – I can’t find the actual numbers – so maybe the most recent numbers show a rise?
that graph is the total presumed symptomatics in society
I am talking about new daily cases (they dont graph but they do put on the website each day)
total in society lags new daily by a week or so
last 3 days have shown a rise – in the noise though
That makes sense. Do they give past new daily cases or do you just have to keep your own record?
Could be plausible, but I honestly suspect we already hve reached enough herd immunity in the young, primnarily from prior infection, that any apparent “rise” is a statistical artefact now and not a real effect.
I bet they didn’t flinch when it came to jabbing the sick and vulnerable in their care.Now it’s an problem!
That’s a bit crass. Both care home residents and carers are being used by our politicians.
I’m a Care Home Nurse please educate me?
Hi Teddy. I thought you meant ‘care home workers were happy to be jabbing the sick in their care, now they are complaining about having to be jabbed themselves’. I don’t think there is anything wrong with the vulnerable being vaccinated by I do object to the healthy being vaccinated.
As for the second sentence I just meant ‘used for political gain’. Nothing specific to be read into it.
“I don’t think there is anything wrong with the vulnerable being vaccinated”
Really! With an experimental drug, instead actually giving them they care and compassionate treatment they need and deserve?
Wouldn’t be even better if they didn’t need care and compassionate treatment? Or at least they didn’t need so much?
Everybody needs care and compassionate treatment, very few need experimental drugs, unless they missed the care and treatment phase.
Anyway, that’s £50 please.
It is a vaccine. The idea of vaccines is to prevent illness not to treat it. A bonus of a prophylactic is that the subject doesn’t need care or treatment. I am sorry but I know nurses who understand the difference between a prophylactic and a treatment and who will get my money.
So long as consent for all individuals is respected and no coercion nor ID cards applied your argument in this latest post of yours stands unopposed.
Would be better if they were cared for by families, the way it always was, rather than locked away in grim facilities. Would be better if medics would realise that when treatment can only prolong existence and not restore life to normal quality then it is time to let a patient choose to end it there, rather than be forcibly kept alive for months of being shuffled between care home and hospital, each time with more intrusive and unpleasant treatments used to eek out ever shorter gains in life expectancy at the price of ever worsening life quality.
I agree. I wouldn’t blame medics. They just provide options. It is the way society is structured.
Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogenshttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4516275/?fbclid=IwAR1dF-S5-EUi8IP08ZDJ_VcbrBMFMOf1AW4U07wxQFuBMkfIgD8JVZ9OJvw
This is not “critical thinking” but just “everybody who isn’t VACCINATED is GOING TO DIE !!!1” with a slightly different colour.
There are still two good reasons for “COVID vaccination”, namely
Neither the first nor the second is on the cards. Hence, “the people who want it” are neither convinced that it’s essential nor willing to make a win – win trade. So, kindly, inject yourselves with whatever magical sauce you believe to be necessary today.
Anyone would think the vaccinated hospital staff can’t infect their patients. Beyond a joke.
Stop complying. Start fighting. This needs stopping now. FIGHT. BACK. BETTER. Regularly updated website with useful information and links: https://www.LCAHub.org/
If the state can force you to have a medical proceedure then state has ultimate authority over your body. At that point you are no longer a free citizen, but a slave. You may live in a gilded cage, but you are owned outright.
Funnily enough ownership may be more literal than that. I hear that corporations have been able to make legal claims that they own any organism modified by use of their genetic products, now in normal times if a pharma company tried that on human beings the judge would likely use his gavel in a most undignified way, then have them thrown out of the court with bruises all over, but the way justice has been corrupted (look how Simon Dolan was ignored) a judge of the new abnormal would come down on the corporation’s side*.
*and they’d bend enough facts to do it, the mRNA vaccines don’t even technically cause genetic modification as per the usual definition, there are no inheritable germline effects, but the judge would ignore this crucial point about GM definitions in an effort to appease the new abnormal monopolists
Yeah I call BS.
Consistently on large surveys of US nurses 30% do not want the vaccine.
https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/work-environment/health-safety/disaster-preparedness/coronavirus/what-you-need-to-know/year-one-covid-19-impact-assessment-survey/
Seems (ahem) overly optimistic. At least when compared with the results of a survey here just two months ago.
A third of West Australian aged care workers would quit the industry if forced to get COVID-19 vaccinations, according to a new survey.
https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/coronavirus/wa-aged-care-workers-reject-forced-jabs-c-3148429
they will need a new variant soon
we ‘opened up’ with the most ludicrously pessimistic SAGE forecasts
they will need a new scare tactic if they want us closed down this winter
Context is everything. In principle it can in my view be justified to mandate that carers and medical staff (who often deal with vulnerable patients) be vaccinated, as many elderly patients will not find the vaccine as effective as younger people, so might be better protected by having people around them less likely to transmit the disease. Before you guys all pile on, that’s the THEORY. In practice:
Any action we take can only be justified if the marginal reduction in absolute risk from that action is significant. If only one carer out of twenty is unvaccinated – does it make any difference? If for example care home visits are to resume (which surely they must given the benefits to residents) presumably the increase in risk from that, even if all visitors are vaccinated, will dwarf the benefits of all staff being vaccinated. And then that action needs to be weighed against negatives, i.e. vaccine injury, the evil of coercion and the awful precedent the mandate sets, the prospect of mass resignations amongst carers and what that will mean for care home residents etc.,
A great many – maybe all – of the governments actions suffer from the same problem.
They might of course say that a great number of actions are required if the total is greater than the sum of parts, or even if the sum is significant. That isn’t the right way to make decisions that are of ethical relevance, however.
All reasonable.
The major missing point is that these treatments are new and untested. We literally do not know what the long term effects will be.
In that situation, it is just wrong to mass vaccinate, let alone to coerce vaccination.
The only justification for either would be a genuine existential emergency. But covid was never that and was never likely to be that. It certainly can’t remotely be pretended to be such now.
Agreed, Mark. The virus has an IFR of 0.15% and declining, its now definitely in the ‘flu’ range. There is no justification for the measures previously employed, yet they are getting worse and more intrusive. Mandating a potentially harmful ’emergency use’ injection that provides neither immunity nor stops transmissionability has no justification. And employing those mandates and coercion to introduce mandated health passes for enjoying what used to be regarded as normal freedoms is evil.
It is a special kind of thinking that considers something that has been administered to hundreds of millions of people round the globe under intense scrutiny as “untested”.
We can’t be certain of the long term effects – but historically vaccine safety issues (which are rare) have emerged within two months.. Meanwhile we have no idea of the long term effects of getting Covid but it appears to have medium term effects and other viruses have had long term effects.
“It is a special kind of thinking that considers something that has been administered to hundreds of millions of people round the globe under intense scrutiny as “untested”.”
That special kind known as “rational”.
There’s a reason the protocols for new vaccines, and especially for novel gene therapy based treatments, take several years to complete. These covid treatments were and still are only legal to use because of a supposed “emergency”. The idea that a respiratory virus of a generally familiar type that has not hugely impacted on global death numbers and certainly hasn’t exceeded the numbers we would normally expect from the periodic flu pandemics we have always been subject to, is an “emergency” of this kind is ridiculous.
What actually is “special” is the thinking that says we face a situation in 2021, or even in 2020, that justifies gambling with the long term health of almost the entirety of the human race.
“Meanwhile we have no idea of the long term effects of getting Covid but it appears to have medium term effects and other viruses have had long term effects.”
Longer term consequences of viral infections are nothing new, and allowing for the general hysteria there’s no reason whatsoever to assume this is anything new in that regard.
“something that has been administered to hundreds of millions of people round the globe under intense scrutiny as “untested”.
This reminds me of why I regard you as dishonest. You are clearly intelligent enough to understand the difference between “tested” and “currently being tested”. And yet you pretend (perhaps to yourself as well) that your confusion of the two here represents some kind of honest response to the point to which you were replying.
If the worst known potential downsides (pointed out by fully reputable and absolutely top notch scientists in the relevant fields), of massive ADE, or of pushed evolution of more virulent variants, do come to pass, will people like you admit that your gamble cost millions of lives? Or will you just pretend the consequences were “unexpected” and “unfortunate”, and “necessary”?
I’m betting the latter, because that’s what dishonest people do.
You wrote they that they were “untested”. Of course they have had many, many tests – so they are not untested – and of course they will continue to be monitored in the future like all vaccinations and drugs.
(If you think I am dishonest why on earth are you wasting your time responding to my comments?)
If the very worst possible side effects emerged then I would admit that I made an enormous error of judgement. I have no idea what the people who actually made the decision to use the vaccines would admit to. I hope that you would react in a similar way if it transpires that the vaccines actually saved millions of lives.
“You wrote they that they were “untested”. Of course they have had many, many tests – so they are not untested – and of course they will continue to be monitored in the future like all vaccinations and drugs.”
Untested in the sense that the tests are incomplete.
But you knew that.
“(If you think I am dishonest why on earth are you wasting your time responding to my comments?)“
Replies here are not necessarily aimed solely, or at all, at the person they are addressed to. And it’s sometimes useful to address points raised regardless of the suspected motivation or likely responses in the mind of the other. As much as anything, discussion here is useful practice for real life exchanges. Unlike the likes of “lordsnooty” you are clearly intelligent and informed enough to be worth engaging with, I just bear in mind that honest persuasion is not likely to be an option.
Also, such a conclusion is necessarily speculative.
“If the very worst possible side effects emerged then I would admit that I made an enormous error of judgement.”
But in that you have admitted that you are condoning a reckless gamble with human health on a literally unprecedented scale. It’s no good saying “I’ll feel guilty if it goes wrong but I’ll be vindicated if the risks don’t come to pass”.
That’s the moral equivalent of putting a round in a revolver, spinning the cylinder, putting it to someone’s head and pulling the trigger, saying “I’ll feel guilty if the gun goes off but not if it doesn’t”.
That is the essence of the moral crime that is inherent in the ongoing mass vaccination scandal.
“I have no idea what the people who actually made the decision to use the vaccines would admit to. I hope that you would react in a similar way if it transpires that the vaccines actually saved millions of lives.”
No, as I pointed out, the mass vaccination is a reckless gamble that cannot be justified by the effects of covid. That’s obvious from the fact that it has needed a massive, unprecedented scaremongering propaganda campaign (as observed by this expert in that particular field), with endless lies and massive censorship and media and behavioural manipulation, to persuade people to support it.
There’s not a chance in Hell they could have got this through if they’d been honest about the risks and issues on both sides.
Your argument seems to be:
The trouble is
Why not stick to the arguments and evidence rather than accusations of dishonesty?
With respect to the “gamble”. I didn’t say the very worst consequences were remotely probable. You just asked me how I would react if they happened. We have to weigh the alternatives. To date Coronavirus has killed over four million people. It is hard to estimate how many lives vaccines will save but it gives an idea of the order of magnitude. Bear in mind that ADE and evolution of the virus can happen as a result of natural immunity as well as vaccine immunity. In fact ADE was first noticed as a consequence of getting dengue fever.
No, I’ve explained why I get the impression you are dishonest (on this topic). It’s not to do with disagreeing with me, it’s to do with particular modes of disagreement in particular cases.
“With respect to the “gamble”.”
We have no real idea how likely these major issues are to come to pass, beyond knowing that they are very real possibilities. It’s a blind gamble.
Dr Robert Malone (who is as well qualified on the topic as anyone on the planet) says ADE is one of the main reasons there have not been successful coronavirus vaccines based on this technology in the past. But there’s no reason to expect ADE from a respiratory coronavirus itself.
We think that mass vaccination with leaky vaccine has had the effect of pushing evolution of more dangerous variants in other cases, and that alone should have removed any possibility of doing it in this case.
The other big risks are in widespread serious health consequences that take time to show up. We know that these “vaccines” promote blood clotting and damage to blood vessels, and there’s obviously a real risk that there could be damage being done that will not show up for years or decades. Again, blindly gambling with human health on a literally unprecedented scale.
Whether in the long run these “vaccines” will save any lives from covid remains to be seen.We are already facing the likelihood of a prompt “booster”. But the idea that significantly more lives can be saved via mass vaccination – merely slowing the spread through the population a bit – is rather questionable. most of the gains would be from targeted vaccination of highly vulnerable categories.
Regardless, the numbers involved simply can never justify this kind of gamble with other people’s futures. It’s a moral crime on a colossal scale.
That’s clear from the fact that an unprecedented campaign of lies, scaremongering and coercion has been required to get people to acquiesce to it.
But they are untested. The Pfizer vaccine has no published animal safety trials and has never been tested in people who have already had COVID, which is a majority of younger people. We’ve never seen all cause mortality in frail elderly people assessed against a control group. Administering a treatment to millions of people without thorough, systematic followup of all adverse events and deaths and a proper control group is not testing. That’s how the thalidomide disaster came about.
“The Pfizer vaccine has no published animal safety trials“. This is a myth.
“has never been tested in people who have already had COVID” they may not have been part of the formal RCT (not sure about this) but since then plenty of people who have had Covid have been vaccinated. No issues have emerged.
We’ve never seen all cause mortality in frail elderly people assessed against a control group
You can go on asking for specific tests of specific groups forever. My claim is that they have been tested, not that they have been subject to every conceivable test. However, we have masses of experience of the vaccine efficacy for elderly people e.g. vaccinated elderly people are less likely to get a severe Covid infection than vaccinated people.
Uhm – is there any reason why you can’t have the vaccine and the next best option (and the next but one)?
The point is that if you have done one, then the marginal benefit of also doing the other is reduced. By how much, will depend on the efficacy of each in isolation, and also the extent to which the failure of each is correlated to that of the other. I don’t know what the false negative rate is of the test that one can do, but if it is very low then it would be preferable to vaccination in isolation. If however, the false negative rate is quite high, and the ‘failure to prevent infection’ rate (of care home staff) is also quite high, and these rates aren’t linked, then it would make sense to have both. It’s easy to go down the rabbit hole with this kind of thinking, however, and you end up where we are, with absolutely immense costs that ultimately will achieve very little, with, most likely, the only action with anything to show for it being the vaccination of the elderly and vulnerable.
Personally, I’d consider taking the vaccine next spring if it passes the ‘winter test’ with flying colours. Summer is always easy and I’ll take any data until then with a pinch of salt. So far, I’m pretty happy with my decision to wait and see.
be careful with your arguments, things like this are the crap the labour party has fallen for, the idea that medical apartheied is somehow ok if testing can give a temporary pass to “freedom”. Any discrimination on medical status is unacceptable, any ID card is intolerable, simply saying one can have a vax pss without the vax does nothing in reality to lessen the danger such apartheied poses.
Absolutely no! Just because I might look after ‘vulnerable’ people doesn’t give anyone the right to decide what I do with my body and my health. Not now, not ever! That is the thin end of the wedge of deciding about me and my bodily sovereignty for whatever spurious reason you might care to come up with. The fact that you don’t think your particular reason is spurious is irrelevant.
(I’m using you as a whole not you in person)
Just had my first jab. Couldn’t be more pleased!
Why?
For medical reasons I have had to wait until now. It is a huge relief to finally take the first step towards increased protection against infection and serious illness. Of course that’s pretty negligible until three weeks after the second dose.
“For medical reasons I have had to wait until now.”
Did you have a lobotomy?
No – two stem cell transplants.
In that case good luck to you.
You are at very high risk from covid, and thus the vaccines really will offer significant protection from serious disease for you. Any longer term risks from complications should be very tolerable for you, as should a need for 6 monthly booster injections each with low (but definitely present) side effects.
I’d presume that you could see that young healthy individuals have no need for the vaccine to protect themselves, and neither is there any benefit for others in their getting vaccinated (given the very poor performance of the vaccines at preventing infection).
Thanks.
I can assure you that any side effects from vaccines will seem trivial compared to side effects of ongoing treatment.
I don’t agree that the performance of the vaccines in preventing infection is very poor. There has been a lot of seizing on evidence to support a prior belief – and given the amount of data out there it is always going to be possible to find some. The picture I am getting is of somewhat reduced efficacy against infection with the Delta variant plus declining efficacy against infection over time – hence the need for a booster.
But there is little to be gained by going over the evidence again and again …
But it doesn’t increase protection – it merely (supposedly) mitigates against symptoms. You can still catch the virus and spread it – but you now have the added risk of medium-to-long-term adverse effects.
I think will have to agree to differ on this.
Great Scott, I hope you are just saying that because they paid you to do so.
If only:-). No I am convinced by the evidence – clearly most of the people here are not but I suggest it is not worth going over all that yet again.
“No I am convinced by the evidence”
I’ve just pissed myself
Well, as you can still catch and spread Covid, you’d still best Stay At Home.
It is a matter of probabilities. My chances of getting it and spreading will be somewhat reduced – my chances of getting seriously ill very much reduced.
They would be further reduced if Ivermectin were made available.
I’m not sure that he should be taking that after two stem cell transplants — that’s something for senior medics to consider.
That said, he might be at lower risk if his loved ones were to take Ivermectin as a prophylactic — there wouldn’t be any real risk to them, but it is of course something that only they could decide — perhaps MTF should discuss this with them if serious covid returns this winter.
He may not be suitable for any vaccine if his immunity is severely compromised.
Just saying……
The longer you leave it after a stem cell transplant the more effective a vaccine is likely to be. Ideally you should wait a year and then have all your childhood vaccines again (except the ones that use a live pathogen). However, where the pathogen is highly prevalent – Covid and Flu in this case – the advice is to take the vaccines early even though they will be less effective.
But as an experienced nurse surely you know this?
As an experienced nurse, I wouldn’t advise anybody to receive an experimental drug unless they’re in extremis.
And as a husband who’s wife is severely immuno-compromised.
There’s a hundred and one other pathogens that are more concerning that covid. Good luck.
Dear Sir, Please read what the makers of these treatments have confirmed, what the – beknighted – UK government and a mass of other medics/scientists have also confirmed; these experimental gene therapies inject a cocktail of ….nanoparticles which induce your own previously compromised immune system to produce the spike protein, the SARS COV 2 organism that does all the damage if it replicates in quantity. I recognise you are between a rock and a herd place (sic) and I hope you get enough vitamin C and D plus other minerals and the delivery of Ivermectin arrives in time.
I wish you all god health.
Thank you for your good wishes.
Yes I understand that vaccines reproduce (almost – it is not quite identical) the virus spike protein. It is not the part of the virus that “does all the damage”, the virus as whole does that, although there is some evidence that in large enough quantities in the wrong places the spike protein can be harmful. However, unlike the virus, the vaccines only produce the spike protein in limited quantities and the vast majority of it either stays in the injection site or passes to the liver where it is destroyed.
I am sure you will understand that I will continue to take my medical guidance from my excellent consultant and her team – not from blogs, YouTube videos or internet discussion groups.
I’m beginning to understand your quasi-religious fervour towards the vaccines now. Hope is a very powerful thing.
Unfortunately Pfizer’s own bio-distribution study, did not show that it stayed in the injection site or was cleared by the liver. But your medical team will have seen that and explained it all I’m sure.
Pfizer’s own bio-distribution study, did not show that it stayed in the injection site or was cleared by the liver.
Are you sure of this? From what I have read, Pfizer didn’t do a bio-distribution study in humans as it was considered unnecessary. The one in mice (study R-20-0072) showed that almost all of the injection stayed in the injection site or the liver with minute quantities elsewhere.
Here you go, read and weep:
The THL’s chief physician Hanna Nohynek said she hopes that as many children and young people will get the jab — to protect themselves as well as others.
Finland began offering Covid vaccines to children aged 12-15 on Monday and decisions about whether or not to get the jab are left up to the kids themselves.
Twelve-year-old Otto Suksi from the city of Vantaa was among the first of his age group to sign up for the vaccine.
“I read in [newspaper] Helsingin Sanomat that vaccinations are being offered to my peer group. I told my mother right away that I wanted to take it as soon as possible. If I get [Covid], it won’t be too serious,” he said.
His mother did not oppose her son’s decision.
That choice is, at least in principle, being left up to the roughly 250,000 youngsters across Finland who belong to the 12-15 year-old age group.
Following brief consultations, healthcare professionals will determine whether kids are capable of making such decisions, based on their age as well as their developmental level, according to Hanna Nohynek, a vaccinologist and chief physician at the Institute for Health and Welfare (THL).
“It depends on how mature the child is, whether they understand what’s at stake and whether they want to make the decisions for themselves. If the care worker determines a child is mature enough and wants to make the decision, then it will be dealt with accordingly,” Nohynek said.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/in_finland_kids_choose_whether_or_not_to_get_covid_vaccine/12052453
Well it is now clear that God no longer believes in us!
My kids are sub 12 but if it comes to it I am going to keep the home from school the day the vaccinator arrives. Too easy to see it happening without my consent – e.g. kid does it to be cool or whatever.
Just because this is an article about the US.
Today the US put France on its equivalent of amber plus list (level 4), not quite red. So travellers from the US are advised by the CDC and the Feds not to go to France, but they are not stopped from getting on planes. In reality it makes getting travel/health insurance tricky ( as I found out the other way round).
Anyway in itself not that surprising as half of Europe seems to be on level 4 , including UK, Spain, Netherlands etc.
But its the reason that’s interesting. Its the ‘Reunion’ situation again, only this time its Martinique. Yes its an island in the Caribbean, a lot nearer the US than mainland France. Its just closed down almost completely, ejecting tourists, because the ‘cases have exploded. So their numbers are added into the overall French numbers and have passed the magic line in the sand the US uses.
None of this makes logical sense, but little about international restrictions does. Its all being used to keep changing the goal posts so often that it makes it very difficult/risky to leave your country borders, which is the plan of course.
Which is why you need about 3 options for routes that need constant attention.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58159573
“Prof Pollard also warned that herd immunity was “not a possibility” because the delta variant would continue to infect people who had been vaccinated.”
“Over time, there needed to be a move away from community testing of mild infections – which will boost people’s immunity – to clinically-driven testing of people who become unwell, he added.”
“But the head of the Oxford Vaccine Group said doses needed to “go where they can have the greatest impact” – to protect unvaccinated people abroad.”
“Even if all children were vaccinated, that wouldn’t stop transmission of the virus, he said.”
It would go down badly in Utah, wouldn’t it. Isn’t that where the Amish are from?
Wondering what the us hospitals will do when many healthcare providers leave their jobs or are terminated for not taking the poison. Boy will they have a problem on their hands then.