This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Just been on the news about low take up of the vaccines. Chief Exec of the Runnymede Trust mentioned poverty, financial exclusion and racism could be factors (paraphrasing). However, vaccine take up within BME NHS staff is also very low, and I’d guess that poverty and financial exclusion are not key factors within NHS staff (I’m not saying they’re are all well paid). And I would also question the levels of racism and how it would impact on vaccine take up.
If we want to find the answers (and I have a professional interest in this), people need to stop coming out with the usual sound bites. I actually wonder whether a history of oppression has developed a sense of distrust of ‘the state’ (I’ve mentioned this before). All this ‘people thinks it’s been developed too quickly’....hmm.....I’m a clever bloke and I wouldn’t have had a bloody clue how long it would normally take to develop a vaccine. And so I wonder whether within these communities there is too much gossipy tittle tattle, a lack of trust of The State and exacerbated by BME NHS staff not taking the vaccine. Using the phrase ‘vaccine hesitancy ‘ isn’t specific enough to help us plan the way forward. Struggling to see a link with poverty and financial exclusion though.
Not the most coherent waffle....Night night : )
11
1
In reply to mick taylor:
There probably is a similar effect with the Corona virus vaccination discussion, as compared with the pseudo-news that was pushed hard by foolish people against measles vaccination, especially by that despicable doctor, whose name I thankfully cannot remember; but all aided by platforms such as Face Book. Such groups as procreate the incorrect information, have no concept of evidence-based medicine.
5
In reply to mick taylor:
Two key factors are the long memories of appalling unethical scientific work on BAME groups across the western world (especially in the US) as recently as the 1970s and the targeted misinformation on social media, as featured on Panorama in the last week. BAME NHS and care staff tend to be a much higher proportion of the lowest paid with less shift flexibility and transport options for appointments.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000scy8/panorama-vaccines-the-disinf...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United...
5
2
In reply to Offwidth:
It would be interesting to see if most of the BAME avoiding vaccines could cite those examples or had any idea they existed. A decent control group may be non-BAME who have suffered similar.
There is another explanation, but you can guarantee it will be studiously ignored because the immediate response will likely be "racism!". That would be cultural group differences and relative exposure to science and functioning states. BAME is a wide camp, and Nigerians will be different from Congolese and Nigerian doctors different from Nigerian market workers. Just as each of these groups places a different aggregate emphasis on religion, education and science, so there will likely be group difference in vaccine take-up.
If I were to talk about the failures of Gaijin to conform to social norms in Japan, their inability to assimilate, and to pin that on the incompatibilities of aspects of the American or British culture they have brought with them and won't discard, no one would bat an eyelid and would recognise I was referring to group differences on a wide scale. To even attempt to go there when discussing BAME communities in the UK on the other hand is far too risky
25
7
In reply to Offwidth:
> Two key factors are the long memories of appalling unethical scientific work on BAME groups across the western world (especially in the US) as recently as the 1970s and the targeted misinformation on social media, as featured on Panorama in the last week. BAME NHS and care staff tend to be a much higher proportion of the lowest paid with less shift flexibility and transport options for appointments.
This does seem the most likely but I hope someone is urgently taking a more rigorous approach to finding the cause and developing counter strategies.
We essentially have to trust this has been developed and certified safely. There's a long history of corporate mistakes and cover-ups so we're reliant on regulators, on the state and while I may despise our useless corrupt government I have enough residual faith in the arms length institutions to trust I'm not being sterilised or given hallucinogens or a placebo in some horrible experiment when I go for my shot. People who've until very recently been living in fear of the home office exiling them illegally because of the colour of their skin, they can't afford my complacency. Earning their trust is a huge challenge, too big really to be the answer here given the urgency, an alternative will be needed. I'd guess it'll be a trusted front, role models and advocates beyond the reach of government.
I have no idea what's going on on social media, who's being told and sold what, none of us really do in a definitive way, only what we each see. That's an alarming problem we have to face up to urgently but probably won't while it still brings governments to power.
jk
3
4
In reply to RentonCooke:
> There is another explanation, but you can guarantee it will be studiously ignored because the immediate response will likely be "racism!". That would be cultural group differences and relative exposure to science and functioning states...
How well a state functions is a matter of perspective.
> ...To even attempt to go there when discussing BAME communities in the UK on the other hand is far too risky
You don't half ham it up. It's pretty clear certain sub-groups within British 'BAME' will have ties to countries and cultures with deeply entrenched, actively promoted anti-vax movements, Nigeria being perhaps the most obvious example. I don't see how that's contentious.
jk
11
3
In reply to RentonCooke:
As ever you know more than the experts... maybe at last you can explain your qualifications to function as such an amazing polymath.
http://www.gponline.com/gps-tackle-vaccine-hesitancy-bame-communities/artic...
Assimilation to health structures in the UK is certainly an issue but a very complex one including high proportions in deprived areas with the most stretched services, less than ideal past responses to help, language problems, even a good number of illegal status. I'm sure there are a small minority of serious cultural and religious effects too (or FGM would never be a problem here). Equating the UK BAME experience with the situation in Japan is so mad its funny.
7
7
In reply to Offwidth:
> As ever you know more than the experts... maybe at last you can explain your qualifications to function as such an amazing polymath.
> Assimilation to health structures in the UK is certainly an issue but a very complex one including high proportions in deprived areas with the most stretched services, less than ideal past responses to help, language problems, even a good number of illegal status. I'm sure there are a small minority of serious cultural and religious effects too (or FGM would never be a problem here). Equating the UK BAME experience with the situation in Japan is so mad its funny.
No madder than you equating the U.K. BAME experience to that of the BAME community in the USA.
14
4
In reply to baron:
Read that GPs post and try talking to some BAME people...these past medical horror stories are real and are deliberately misused all the time on social media by anti vaxers targetting the UK BAME communities.
6
4
In reply to Offwidth:
> Read that GPs post and try talking to some BAME people...these past medical horror stories are real and are deliberately misused all the time on social media by anti vaxers targetting the UK BAME communities.
I don’t doubt that is happening.
However, given that many NHS and care staff are from the BAME community and that these communities have been hard hit by Covid, one might have hoped that recent personal experiences of death and illness would easily overwhelm some nonsense posted on the internet.
10
1
In reply to Offwidth:
I talk to BAME people every day; my wife, daughter, and in-laws. Every now and then we have no choice but to end up at bat-sh1t crazy Pentecostal church events and cannot avoid all sundry of other functions where, in amongst the richness and warmth of West African culture, it's manifest shortcomings are laid bare. I have a close connection to the African community at large in London, my wife's PhD research was on exactly that, and she is usually the first to point these shortcomings out.
It is zero surprise to us that swathes of that community, through some extremely twisted logic that has nothing to do with misdeeds of white men at some prior point in history, will avoid vaccines and health advice generally. I expect similar things are going on in Muslim communities.
Why that can never be the starting point of the discussion, given it probably accounts for the lion's share of failing health interventions, and instead we need to fish around for something my grandfather's generation may have done is beyond me. Well, actually it isn't. It is entirely in keeping with the self-flagellating discomfort people seem to have around discussing race differences. It does no good for the BAME community. Fortunately, the BAME I know have no such discomfort and are likely more ready to have this discussion than liberal white folk, if only white folk were willing to start it with them.
Post edited at 11:11
31
5
In reply to RentonCooke:
So just anecdote linked to your politics then and, in emphasis, in direct contradiction of these BAME GPs who have been investigating and countering the problems in their communities.
6
12
In reply to jkarran:
> We essentially have to trust this has been developed and certified safely. There's a long history of corporate mistakes and cover-ups so we're reliant on regulators, on the state and while I may despise our useless corrupt government I have enough residual faith in the arms length institutions to trust I'm not being sterilised or given hallucinogens or a placebo in some horrible experiment when I go for my shot.
No we don't. It's up to you and you alone to decide who to trust, certainly regulators and data should be used to inform your decision. Are you suggesting we be told by the state who to trust and then that be enforceable? Regardless of your stance on necessity of having 100% of the population vaccinated against covid, you have to admit this would be a questionable move.
6
In reply to RentonCooke:
If you Google Mosque Vaccination you will see that in many places the Mosques have opened up as vaccination centres. London, Bradford, Halifax, Nottingham and probably other places.
Around 7% of British doctors are Muslim. There is a great respect for the medical profession in the Muslim community in my experience. Looking after your health is considered a religious obligation.
11
In reply to mick taylor:
Do we actually have accurate figures?
On one of the other threads it appear than not everyone has been asked their ethnicity.
Given the possibility that Covid risk is due to or correlated with ethnicity this is concerning.
In reply to TomD89:
> No we don't. It's up to you and you alone to decide who to trust, certainly regulators and data should be used to inform your decision.
You've lost me, you seem to be angrily agreeing but start with a 'No'.
> Are you suggesting we be told by the state who to trust and then that be enforceable?
No, that's nonsense.
> Regardless of your stance on necessity of having 100% of the population vaccinated against covid, you have to admit this would be a questionable move.
Out of curiosity, what do you think my stance on 100% vaccination and compulsion is?
jk
Post edited at 12:49
4
1
In reply to baron:
It's a whole series of factors including misinformation. Watch that Panorama programme if you doubt how much of an affect such misinformation can have. One key issue in this was it was medical staff (now mainly suspended) including senior medics claiming this ant-vax nonsense.
If you want UK examples of historical failures in medical ethics Pappworth is a good person to study.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Henry_Pappworth
Post edited at 13:03
3
In reply to RentonCooke:
I don't disagree with some of what you are saying, but isn't vaccine hesitancy/refusal more linked to social disadvantage and education?
Mike Tildesley has been quite vocal in pointing out what he sees as the danger of the wealthy middle classes being highly vaccinated in contrast to some deprived communities. I see the disparity, although I think it's hard to argue that it's much to do with wealth per se, given that the vaccine is free in Europe and US, I think. My impression is that vaccine uptake is more to do with social engagement and education - with traditional and religious views being one expression of this.
7
In reply to Offwidth:
> So just anecdote linked to your politics then and, in emphasis, in direct contradiction of these BAME GPs who have been investigating and countering the problems in their communities.
White man with one set of political assumptions, citing anecdotal evidence of BAME doctor to dismiss white man with another set of political assumptions citing anecdotal evidence of BAME doctor.
How very UKC
18
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
...and referring to "BAME people" as if they are a distinct subspecies, homogeneous and unable to process information like others.
10
1
In reply to marsbar:
My experience, which is a) volunteering in a vaccine centre; and b) being vaccinated myself at a different centre. Everyone is asked their ethnicity.
In reply to mick taylor:
"Multiple vaccines are now available. They are safe and have minimal side effects. Without a vaccine you might die or suffer long covid. Social media has deadly consequences."
Adverts should be this blunt. Those who refuse a jab when offered should be put to the back of any queue when it comes to medical care.
A harsh take on it but the rights of an individual aren't infinite.
2
1
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Unitl Covid surfaced I would suggest that the antivax message in the UK was quite strong amongst even the middle classes.Certainly the likes of Paltrow etc seemed to be having a stupifying effect as regards MMR.( this suggests exactly the opposite to your argument that only the wealthy middle class get vaccinated)
Yet it seems to have vanished overnight with Covid in the UK amongst that group.
2
In reply to jkarran:
No anger whatsoever, just disagreeing politely with your premise that we have to trust this is safe. We don't, individuals must consider and decide for themselves even in a pandemic scenario. That is both their right and responsibility. I've noticed increasing calls for compelling and coercing lately both on this forum and the news in general so apologies if I have misunderstood you.
Thankfully from your reply I can now glean that in fact you are against any compulsion for vaccination and likely do not think 100% require it. Duly noted for future.
Post edited at 14:21
4
In reply to neilh:
> Unitl Covid surfaced I would suggest that the antivax message in the UK was quite strong amongst even the middle classes.
I'd go so far as to say that, precovid, any 'antivax' sentiment was almost exclusively a middle-class thing.
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
Linking evidence from a network of self identified BAME GPs working to counter anti vax propaganda and vaccine reluctance is not the same as a known right wing poster explaining his wife's views second-hand. I'd be delighted if UKC ever got close to the proportion of BAME climbers I see around me indoors, so we could get some more reasonable reporting of direct experience that I witness second hand (let alone UK population levels).
In reply to MG
A shitty childish insult.. it's a standard classification and only one of several disadvantaged groups in society that I've helped fight for equality for decades.
Post edited at 14:44
1
4
In reply to mick taylor:
I have no answers to it, but I have one point I've not seen discussed elsewhere.
Are people who suspect or know they've had the virus less likely to take up the offer of a vaccine?
If so, then one would expect an inverse correlation between communities where prevalence has been higher and vaccine uptake.
2
In reply to Ridge:
Disproportional levels in BAME reluctance to vaccination has been around for a long time. The newness is mass anti vax weaponisation of that on social media.
https://theconversation.com/anti-vaxxers-are-weaponising-the-vaccine-hesita...
Post edited at 14:46
1
In reply to TomD89:
> just disagreeing politely with your premise that we have to trust this is safe. We don't, individuals must consider and decide for themselves even in a pandemic scenario.
If we choose to take it, then we have to trust it is safe.
We have to trust so many other things in our lives are safe; cars we buy & drive, planes we fly in, trains we travel in, food we eat (from all manner of sources), drugs we take, water we drink, electrical products we buy, banks we use to look after our money, etc, etc.
All of these are governed by national and international regulatory bodies.
The vaccines have been assessed by one or more of these regulatory bodies. If you feel that they have not done a good job, maybe you should start questioning all those other regulatory bodies. Collect your own water. Grow your own food. And hope that you understand enough about the risks involved with those 'products' to keep yourself safe.
4
In reply to mick taylor:
My brother's in-laws are originally Jamaican immigrants (Windrush era I think) so he knows quite a few people in that community in South/East London and says that take-up amongst older ages is very low. He puts this down to (1) a lifetime mistrust of white authority figures and (2) a wide variation in the quality of education they received when they were young combined with (3) quite a close-knit community and lots of WhatsApp groups with people peddling inaccurate messages.
I should say that his wife doesn't necessarily agree with all that and should know better.
His positive spin is that he thinks BAME community vaccine take-up will be much higher in younger groups because most of the above doesn't apply to the same extent.
2
In reply to Offwidth:
A blog linking to the Panorama show:
In reply to Offwidth:
> Linking evidence from a network of self identified BAME GPs working to counter anti vax propaganda and vaccine reluctance is not the same as a known right wing poster explaining his wife's views second-hand.
If only you held your own "evidence" up to the same standards you demand from everyone else. The article you link is little more than an opinion piece and the website is commercial so would never stand up as a source suitable to reference in even the lowliest academic work.
If you want to get on your high horse about the obvious superiority of your "evidence" you'd better produce actual superior evidence.
7
1
In reply to neilh:
> Certainly the likes of Paltrow etc seemed to be having a stupifying effect as regards MMR.( this suggests exactly the opposite to your argument that only the wealthy middle class get vaccinated)
It's difficult to know how much of what she does is down to self-obsessed ignorance and how much is merely cynical exploitation but it seems that the middle classes are fickle when faced with a brush with mortality.
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
It's all there if you search, as you well know. It would be very time consuming and tiresome to first principle prove everything, when it is a common research position: good quality journalistic sources that link to the work are normally much easier to understand on a public forum. However for covid vaccine reluctance those papers will take time so in the meantime I will trust the very common view of the professionals on the 'coal-face'...
Those who challenge standard accepted positions can occasionally be right in history (science is littered with outsiders who shifted paradigms) but they are not common here.... I welcome anecdote of diference as long as it's not being misused (to disprove obvious evidence)
Following your own arguments, if you think I'm wrong feel free to link research to show that (I am sometimes and always apologise). You imply it's common so I shouldn't need to play with tumbleweed while I wait for an example.
Post edited at 15:31
1
5
In reply to Kalna_kaza:
> Adverts should be this blunt. Those who refuse a jab when offered should be put to the back of any queue when it comes to medical care.
The issue there is that overly blunt adverts can be counterproductive. It can push waverers into complete denial and make those already opposed pretty much irretrievable.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
> It's difficult to know how much of what she does is down to self-obsessed ignorance and how much is merely cynical exploitation but it seems that the middle classes are fickle when faced with a brush with mortality.
Guardian had an interesting article on wellness gurus today and how some are diving headfirst into conspiracy nuts into anti vaccine whilst others are sobbing quietly in a corner.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/25/how-the-wellness-and...
3
> In reply to MG
> A shitty childish insult.. it's a standard classification and only one of several disadvantaged groups in society that I've helped fight for equality for decades.
Maybe... but it’s also a classification that increasing numbers of those classified by it object to.
In reply to neilh:
> Unitl Covid surfaced I would suggest that the antivax message in the UK was quite strong amongst even the middle classes.Certainly the likes of Paltrow etc seemed to be having a stupifying effect as regards MMR.( this suggests exactly the opposite to your argument that only the wealthy middle class get vaccinated)
> Yet it seems to have vanished overnight with Covid in the UK amongst that group.
That particular painfully stupid strain of woo applied predominantly to vaccinating children, I suppose when the reaper came calling for the parents (and their jobs) plenty will have found new convoluted ways of thinking about things.
Or maybe not, we haven't really got into vaccinating this demographic yet, perhaps we'll prove quite resistant.
jk
1
In reply to Offwidth:
> It's all there if you search,
No it isn't. The reasons for low uptake amongst BAME communities are very much up for debate, not least because of the ridiculous lumping together of everyone who isn't white as one community with one particular set of drives.
> Those who challenge standard accepted positions
There isn't a standard accepted position. What there is is a position you agree with and anyone disagreeing is wrong. Which is indeed standard for you.
> Following your own arguments, if you think I'm wrong feel free to link research to show that (I am sometimes and always apologise). You imply it's common so I shouldn't need to play with tumbleweed while I wait for an example.
It's not that I think you're wrong, it's that I think you're wrong to insist you're right when the main basis for your "rightness" and opposition to another poster seems entirely based on yours and his opposing political perspectives.
Politic perspective has no place in objective assessment.
Post edited at 15:45
9
In reply to Kalna_kaza:
> "Multiple vaccines are now available. They are safe and have minimal side effects. Without a vaccine you might die or suffer long covid. Social media has deadly consequences."
> Adverts should be this blunt. Those who refuse a jab when offered should be put to the back of any queue when it comes to medical care.
> A harsh take on it but the rights of an individual aren't infinite.
It's no good making adverts stating that multiple vaccines are available when we lack the ability to allow people to choose. The only means of choice appears to be refusing the vaccine when ypou turn up and are told which one is being administered on the day of your appointment.
1
In reply to TomD89:
> No anger whatsoever, just disagreeing politely with your premise that we have to trust this is safe. We don't, individuals must consider and decide for themselves even in a pandemic scenario. That is both their right and responsibility.
I said we essentially have to trust this has been developed and certified safely and I stand by that. By have to I don't mean must, I mean that *if* we are to trust the vaccine it can realistically only be by trusting the institutions tasked and equipped to assure its safety and efficacy. We are not individually furnished with the data and for the most part not equipped to meaningfully interpret it. We devolve responsibility for the technicalities to those with access and expertise, those we (most of us anyway) trust to do an impartial professional job in the public interest.
The trust we each place in 'the state', its institutions and machinery is both inherited and earned. It differs, for some individuals and historically victimised/marginalised groups there is understandably very little trust yet it is in everyone's interests that those with good (albeit perhaps now historic) reason to mistrust the state can still be reached by this vaccination program. The more people we can vaccinate the fewer will die, the sooner and more complete our economic and social recovery can be, the less divisive the politics which will emerge from these shocks. Properly building trust takes a genuine desire and lot of time, there is neither so alternatives are needed.
> Thankfully from your reply I can now glean that in fact you are against any compulsion for vaccination and likely do not think 100% require it. Duly noted for future.
I'm 100% for persuasion.
jk
Post edited at 16:07
1
In reply to Stichtplate:
Yes it is, as covid isn't the first vaccination effort where this has been an issue. Plus clear evidence is being presented on covid and acted upon by the national public health leaders (a bit too slowly) and the front line heros countering anti-vax bs.
Mine is a standard position as ar as I am aware... that is a complex one and the factors both Renton and I raised were part of it but unlike him I wasn't trying to say some factors are politicised and wrong.
Yes I get triggered a bit by some posters (especially pound shop Peterson types, or their opposite on the left) but so do you, with Rom for instance. All of life involves politics and way too much science is distorted by it.
2
2
In reply to marsbar:
Yes. Graph from Guardian 4th Feb. Also, survey in Leicester hospital vaccine uptake: 71% white, 59 south Asian. 37 black. Other surveys show about the same. And when you research ‘which ethnic groups suffer most racism’, whilst there is limited research, a paper by Essex Uni shows South Asians suffer more than Black and African, which chimes with my observations and somewhat dispels the ‘people aren’t being vaccinated due to racism’. (although I fully get that oppression and racism is a factor in other ways, eg in the lack of trust of the state and systems etc).
1
In reply to Offwidth:
>>. I'm sure there are a small minority of serious cultural and religious effects too
I believe this is a bigger issue than people think, and I’ve been looking into it (been busy, more later). I agree with your other comments.
In reply to RentonCooke:
Generally agree with all of that. I get very frustrated at the lack of open discussion, which is often spearheaded by people with an agenda which stops looking at some of the dodgy issues (and actually results in people with dodgy views being frightened to speak and hence their views go unchallenged).
3
In reply to Offwidth:
> In reply to MG
> A shitty childish insult.. it's a standard classification and only one of several disadvantaged groups in society that I've helped fight for equality for decades.
It may be blunt but it's not an insult. BAME as a shorthand for "not white" might be useful sometimes but not in this instance. Your assumptions that all BAME people are somehow the same and too stupid to analyse the evidence for vaccines is what's childish.
7
In reply to marsbar:
Yes, good work being done in Mosques. Worth noting that 56% of GPs are BME (general medical council) and the NHS has downs huge amount of work to improve access. Given the higher than average % of BME people in the NHS (compared to other orgs), I don’t get this ‘racism is a factor in vaccine take up’. (usual caveat of the long term impacts of oppression etc).
3
In reply to Si dH:
Totally agree, plus a few other factors. The fact that rhe south Asian community has a higher vaccination rate may be partly due to the high % of Asian doctors, thus developing more trust in the system.
The ‘education ‘ aspect is a good example of where dialogue gets stifled - many pro BME campaigners would say ‘so you are basically saying they are not clever enough to make informed choices?!’ And argy bargy breaks out (or the fear of).
In reply to timjones:
Fair enough, there is no choice of which vaccine you get. I see in Germany a lot of people have refused the AZ vaccine because of some inaccurate comments made about it's effectiveness in older people - words have consequences.
The whole thing is utterly nuts. We have so many people, literally, dying to get a vaccine whilst others are passing up the chance.
I'm fed up with these people, if you don't want the vaccine because of your freedom / antivax conspiracy / mistrust of modern medicine / what your next doors neighbor's second cousin's boyfriend's mate down the community hall said (delete as appropriate) then frankly they can go screw themselves. Just don't come crying when someone close to you is put on a ventilator and never comes around.
I'm sure there are many who would disagree with this take on it but covid doesn't care about anti-vaccine arguments, it'll just take more victims.
4
In reply to Kalna_kaza:
If people are willing to be vaccinated it surely isn't too much to ask to provide a choice to those who have a preference?
3
In reply to timjones:
> If people are willing to be vaccinated it surely isn't too much to ask to provide a choice to those who have a preference?
I’d say that it is. I’ve witnessed people complain about getting the Pfizer vaccine, because they want a British vaccine.
1
In reply to timjones:
> If people are willing to be vaccinated it surely isn't too much to ask to provide a choice to those who have a preference?
Its a massive and complex logistical operation as it is without adding the pick and mix choice approach.
Its not like these people will be making their decision from an overly informed viewpoint is it.
3
In reply to MG:
What are you talking about...?..... there is obviously a huge range of opinion and racial variation within the category but there is also a larger vaccination reluctance within the BAME population as a whole.
5
In reply to timjones:
You seem to be confusing an unprecedented, national vaccination programme where speed is everything with choosing which beer you prefer in a pub.
No, people cant start being picky, for very obvious reasons.
9
In reply to MG:
> You seem to be confusing an unprecedented, national vaccination programme where speed is everything with choosing which beer you prefer in a pub.
> No, people cant start being picky, for very obvious reasons.
Is that going to help to maximise uptake?
3
In reply to mick taylor:
I suspect we would agree. It's a big issue in some african communities but they form a small minority of the BAME population. Other communities are being targeted with online lies that link to religious practice (especially Asians) on things like meat products being in vaccines and other such nonsense. I wouldn't classify that as a religious objection to vaccination as religious leaders are clear vaccination is morally correct within the religion and these vaccines are not problematic.
In reply to mondite:
> Its a massive and complex logistical operation as it is without adding the pick and mix choice approach.
> Its not like these people will be making their decision from an overly informed viewpoint is it.
It really shouldn't be a major logistical challenge to know which product you will be using at a vaccination centre a few days in advance.
Do you want people to just refuse a vaccine for want of the choice?
3
In reply to timjones:
> If people are willing to be vaccinated it surely isn't too much to ask to provide a choice to those who have a preference?
This is a pandemic situation. We are trying to get everyone vaccinated as quickly as possible.
Giving preference to people who have no real idea what they are choosing is going to slow down vaccination for no benefit.
6
In reply to The New NickB:
What about people that have other potentially more valid reasons?
5
In reply to timjones:
> Is that going to help to maximise uptake?
It's currently limited by supply. If people start dicking around, that will likely mean unused doses go to waste and extended time to everyone being vaccinated, and general protection.
2
In reply to timjones:
> What about people that have other potentially more valid reasons?
Well there aren't any valid reasons, so that's not a problem.
3
In reply to timjones:
> Do you want people to just refuse a vaccine for want of the choice?
I want people to stop being so bloody stupid.
There is no sane reason to choose a particular vaccine.
There is no evidence to suggest that the anti vaxxers would pick one of them either.
2
1
In reply to marsbar:
If you want to maximise uptake it would be a good idea to stop being an arsehole and insulting people who are willing to be vaccinated but would like the choice.
10
In reply to jkarran:
And there are plenty of famous or semi-famous folk from BAME communities here in the UK who are actively promoting the uptake of the vaccine among the ethnic communities that they are from or connected to, because as they say, particularly among older people there's lots of ignorance, lack of education and some religious or cultural reluctance.
I heard Romesh Ranganathan making exactly these points on the radio recently, I think he was taking part in the campaign I believe Adil Ray had started. They've been covering it reasonably regularly on Newscast, and they've had on one of the BBC reporters who is from an Indian background, with her elderly mum who was saying just how many whatsapp messages were going round in Punjabi or Urdu (can't remember which - but obviously the fake news crap was getting translated into various minority languages) among her family and friends. This seems to be getting discussed loads by both people from BAME communities and from the majority population as well. I think Renton is just looking for another culture battle to partake in.
3
2
In reply to Dave Garnett:
I think Paltrow is interesting, but she is specifically connected to the "wellness movement" which is really New Age for a new age, and has gone for bat-shit crazy stuff like Q-Anon in the States as well as the whole "Plandemic" bollocks.
I was teaching about cults, sects and the New Age in sociology of religion last term, and although the text books mainly focus on the 80s and 70s for that section, it was very clear that Paltrow and Goop fit perfectly into the sociological classification of audience cults.
There's been quite a lot of coverage in US media that I listen to of the whole Yoga-moms QAnon thing, and it's clearly significantly an upper middle class, white and female phenomena.
In reply to timjones:
> Is that going to help to maximise uptake?
If people really want the specially selected gourmet vaccine rather than the stripey value vaccine then surely they won't mind waiting until the rest of the population is vaccinated?
1
1
9
1
In reply to TobyA:
> There's been quite a lot of coverage in US media that I listen to of the whole Yoga-moms QAnon thing, and it's clearly significantly an upper middle class, white and female phenomena.
I'm not so sure. I think that perspective can be significantly swayed by who has the louder voice on social media (upper middle class white female?) and who you're exposed to media and social circle wise. From my own social (media) circle the Q anon/ anti vax shite has had 50/50 gender split and 70/30 split lower to higher socio economic ratio.
Edit: This perspective is anecdotal and solely UK based where as you were commenting on US based studies so possibly an apples and pears thing.
Post edited at 21:53
1
In reply to mick taylor and anyone. For what its worth.......
The issue: low vaccine uptake within BME communities. These communities have been badly hit by Covid. Survey in a Leicester hospital showed vaccine uptake: 71% white, 59% South Asian, 37% black ; this mirrors a report in The Guardian 4th Feb which also notes that black people aged over 80’s are twice as likely as white over 80’s to NOT have a vaccine.
Watching the news last night and Halima Begum cited poverty, financial exclusion and racism as the reasons why people from BME communities and low vaccine take up. As someone who works with BME communities (asylum and refugees), this did not resonate with my experience of BME communities accessing health care. I also have a bee in my bonnet about support organisations giving such one-sided views that debate becomes stifled. Race and ethnicity are particular prone to this. Many people with borderline dodgy views don’t like speaking out for fear of being labelled ‘racist’ and it is often these people who would benefit most from open dialogue (the hard core racist are a lost cause). A quick search found this (Guardian 4th Feb)
>> Halima Begum, chief executive of the Runnymede Trust, said she first raised concerns about the dangerous exposure of these communities in March last year. “This isn’t about vaccine refusal, because that very rhetoric implies that these communities are doing something wrong, it’s their fault somehow,” she said. “We need to balance the conversation away from hesitancy and uptake to the response to BAME groups and their institutional mistrust now, and how they might be supported to show trust back in our public services like the NHS and the police.”
“There is an important conversation going on around fake news and its impact on vaccine uptake, particularly in BAME communities. [However,] there are other issues at play that need addressing, including deep-seated multigenerational reservations and fear that some people in BAME communities have about accessing the NHS,” Begum said.
“That fear is often based on past experience, whether incidents of simple misunderstanding, cultural confusion or, in the case of some patients, an outright fear of perceived hostility and racism.” <<
Given how Covid has disproportionately effected BME communities and the resources/effort put into the vaccine roll out, I do think individual responsibility into getting vaccinated is a civil duty – Begum does appear to want to shift a big chunk of this responsibility. In looking for information on BME take up of health services I found the paper ‘Access to health care for ethnic minority populations’ in the Post Graduate Medical Journal (BMJ) very interesting:
>>FACTORS INFLUENCING ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE BY ETHNIC MINORITY GROUPS
Explanations offered by researchers for reported disparities in access to health services fall into two main groups. The first group are linked to intrinsic or “personal” factors; these include the particular needs of ethnic minority people that must be met as part of ensuring equitable access. The second group are associated with extrinsic or organisational factors; these focus on the organisation itself and its healthcare delivery and planning systems.
Intrinsic or personal factors
Cultural differences: This is offered as a key explanation for disparities in access to health services by BME populations
Language and literacy: Clearly poor linguistic competence will be a major barrier to access for some people.
“Newness” or user ignorance: This factor is related to the migrant status of people in the BME population, and shows itself through unfamiliarity with the NHS and limited knowledge of available services.
Extrinsic or organisational factors
Differential needs and provision: In some cases, barriers to access may be linked to poor provision of certain services required specifically for ethnic minority groups
Location: The location of health services may result in poor access for certain mobile populations (for example, traveller gypsies, refugees, etc).
Staff training needs: Finally, healthcare staff may have strong stereotypical views, lack cultural awareness, and ability, or generally manage patients from diverse backgrounds in an unsuitable manner, which can create barriers and generate resentment <<
Regarding racism being a reason for low vaccine take up, interesting to note that 56% of GP’s are BME (General Medical Council) and the NHS employs higher than average numbers of people from the BME community. The NHS has made significant in-roads into making their services accessible and large amounts of funding have been targeted towards addressing health inequalities. My observations are that the high % of people from BME backgrounds in the NHS would, if anything, provide a ‘welcoming’, none racist environment. Furthermore, there are numerous examples of BME staff in the NHS proactively encouraging vaccine take up. I can’t find any direct correlation between racism and accessing health services. There is one major caveat to this: the oppression of BME communities, both historically (e.g. slave trade) and more recent examples (race hate crime, lots of research about racist recruitment practices) appear to have created a lack of trust of ‘the state’ and it would be reasonable to assume that this impact on vaccine take up.
In terms of which specific ethnic backgrounds suffer most racism – not much literature. However, from reading the paper: ‘Who experiences ethnic and racial harassment’ from the Institute For Social and Economic Research, Essex University it is clear that Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Chinese suffered more racism than Black African and Caribbean people. This resonates with my experiences both personally and professionally. If racism is a reason to not receive the vaccine, it would be reasonable to assume that those people suffering most racism would be least likely to get the vaccine, but this is not the case.
Regarding fake news: Simon Stevens, NHS chief executive states the following three reasons for low vaccine uptake: access, systematic efforts to misinform and lie and long-standing mistrust. Lets face it, people don’t let go of the past so easily, and the older you get, the more of ‘the past’ you have. And your views can become more entrenched with age. So it is understandable for instance that older people from the Windrush generation don’t trust ‘the state.’ (how many older British white people still go on about the war and Germany and…)
If historical oppression and racism are reasons why people won’t get the jab, then I am at a loss as to what short term (immediate) interventions can overcome this. If, for historical reasons, person X does not trust the NHS, then this trust cannot be won back overnight. Family, community leaders and celebs/role models might be able to persuade people. It is crucial celebs and role models are ‘from the specific community’: plenty of racism exists between these communities. Mosques as vaccination centres are doing great work and have been for some while. Not sure about the Black/African/Caribbean equivalent? Furthermore, the term BME is too ‘all encompassing’ and in order to plan interventions each sub group needs to be looked at separately.
And, as is often the case, another poster provides some good insights. From Si dH up thread: ‘’(a relative) puts the low uptake of the older Jamaican community down to (1) a lifetime mistrust of white authority figures and (2) a wide variation in the quality of education they received when they were young combined with (3) quite a close-knit community and lots of WhatsApp groups with people peddling inaccurate messages.’’ This nicely summarises much of my waffle above, but also highlights possibly the most fundamental issue: education. I’d expand to say education includes having the confidence to act on the knowledge you have and being able to critically analyse the world around you. Large parts of the older BME communities have not had what many of us would call ‘a traditional education’ and appear to be getting drawn into believing a load of old tripe. I wished campaigning groups (like the one at the top of this post) would highlight some of the more contentious issues such as education, but I reckon they feel this would be putting responsibility back on the individual so they choose to point the finger elsewhere (eg racism and financial exclusion) which is not helpful.
9
In reply to RentonCooke:
> I talk to BAME people every day; my wife, daughter, and in-laws. Every now and then we have no choice but to end up at bat-sh1t crazy Pentecostal church events...
> ...we need to fish around for something my grandfather's generation may have done is beyond me.
Pentecostalism being one of the ancient religious traditions of West Africa and nothing to do with anyone's grandfather.
And yes, I am perfectly aware that Christianity shapes itself around pre-existing customs and norms, but still, America has plenty of crazy white Protestants...
1
In reply to timjones:
> What about people that have other potentially more valid reasons?
Can you provide examples of more valid reasons?
2
In reply to seankenny:
> Pentecostalism being one of the ancient religious traditions of West Africa and nothing to do with anyone's grandfather.
What? even if the grandfather in question is a stalwart of the pentecostal church?
> And yes, I am perfectly aware that Christianity shapes itself around pre-existing customs and norms, but still, America has plenty of crazy white Protestants...
There certainly are and a lot of them aren't too concerned with getting vaccinated either cos "Armh bathed in the blood of Jesus!"
3
In reply to TomD89:
> No anger whatsoever, just disagreeing politely with your premise that we have to trust this is safe.
We don’t have to trust anything or anyone. We just need to look at the facts. 18m people have had a jab, of whom several million had it well over a month ago. That’s just in the UK. If there were any deaths or significant adverse effects from the vaccines, don’t you think we will have heard about it by now? (By significant I don’t mean having flu like symptoms for a couple of days.) Put it another way, we’ve had less than 18m people catch Covid so far and yet over 100,000 people have died from it. I know where I’d rather take my chances...
3
In reply to mick taylor:
I think the reasons are many and complex. Nor are BAME people homogenous - what applies to one community or socioeconomic demographic won’t apply to another. Anyone claiming that it’s definitely x y z reasons and not a b c reasons is probably wrong because it could be x y z and a b c as well as d e f but to different extents for different people / communities / demographics.
The other thing I would point out is that we don’t yet know what vaccine uptake will be like in younger people. Will there still be lower take up among BAME people? Perhaps. Will there be lower take up overall compared to the over 70s? Almost certainly. Will there be different take up depending on socioeconomic factors? Probably. The picture will be complex.
2
In reply to Stichtplate:
> What? even if the grandfather in question is a stalwart of the pentecostal church?
Please test your sarcasm receptors
> There certainly are and a lot of them aren't too concerned with getting vaccinated either cos "Armh bathed in the blood of Jesus!"
Well indeed!
In reply to mick taylor:
I am still struggling to understand how someone with a lifetime distrust of the NHS / white authority figures etc would still rather risk a slow painful death to which they are especially susceptible to over a quick injection.
I'm not disagreeing with your points made, it just seems ludicrous so many people would put themselves in harm's way.
3
In reply to timjones:
> If people are willing to be vaccinated it surely isn't too much to ask to provide a choice to those who have a preference?
At present that is difficult. It isn't unusual to get 4 days notice of a vaccine delivery. This includes weekends when we don't have staff in practice to contact/invite patients. To allow timely invites to be sent we can often plan a clinic based upon AstraZeneca (which we have in the fridge with a long shelf life), and then at the last minute if we get a delivery of Pfizer (with shorter shelf life) we switch the clinic to use this, and then repeat the process, organising another date for the AZ vaccine in the fridge. This allows us to run more clinics when the supply is sometimes variable, and also give as much advance notice as possible to patients.
7
In reply to Kalna_kaza
It's pretty simple, its a standard balance of two risks for them. The lies are designed to massively increase the apparent risks of taking the vaccine and reduce the apparent benefits of having it.
2
In reply to mick taylor:
I think that Essex paper requires care in interpretation as it discusses self reporting of problems. Where we have hard statistics on serious issues from a third party (like stop and search data) the larger problems faced by black communities compared to other BAME groups becomes very clear.
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/crime-justice-and-the-la...
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/27/black-people-nine-times-mor...
The pound shop Petersons of the world will tell us this is because those communities commit proportionately more crime but that doesn't explain why black high level professional people report the same issues.
Overall we still have a very serious problem when 84% of BAME survey participants feel the UK is very or somewhat racist.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/06/26/nine-ten-b...
1
In reply to MG:
Back on language for the moment I remembered a good blog on the subject. However, while I have sympathy for the points raised, given the UK doesn't always record ethnicity beyond BAME sub-groups I don't think we can achieve what the blogger asks for as yet.
https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2019/07/08/please-dont-call-me-bame-or-bme...
In reply to timjones:
> It really shouldn't be a major logistical challenge to know which product you will be using at a vaccination centre a few days in advance.
Really? Do you have any idea of how the logistics work? How many people would you need to contact, and what are you offering them? That it's OK for them to refuse a particular vaccine, based on minimal understanding of the differences between them, on the assumption we can come back another day and offer them a different one?
Realistically, you'd simply be offering people an excuse not to be vaccinated based on a empty choice that the vast majority of them wouldn't even understand. If ever there was a time for a bit of old school doing what the doctor tells you, this is it.
5
In reply to Offwidth:
All good points. As someone upthread says, it will be interesting to see how vaccine uptake in younger age groups pans out (I hope people are looking into this now, or have even done some research already).
In reply to Kalna_kaza:
> I am still struggling to understand how someone with a lifetime distrust of the NHS / white authority figures etc would still rather risk a slow painful death to which they are especially susceptible to over a quick injection.
> I'm not disagreeing with your points made, it just seems ludicrous so many people would put themselves in harm's way.
I agree. I don’t think anyone knows. Few years back, a work colleague reckoned that many people whose family originate from parts of Africa and Asia simply have a different attitude to death, based on witnessing and being involved in famine etc where many people die (hence the theory on why some communities have large families). Maybe religious beliefs. Maybe they just don’t think it will happen to them (ie they have poor health literacy). Whatever the reason, in their eyes it must be a bloody good one.
1
In reply to marsbar:
It was intended to highight your own poor attitude!
Do you really think it is "stupid" to make a suggestion that may help to oncrease vaccine uptake in a thread that is about low uptake in some parts of the community?
Post edited at 11:39
2
In reply to chris_r:
> At present that is difficult. It isn't unusual to get 4 days notice of a vaccine delivery. This includes weekends when we don't have staff in practice to contact/invite patients. To allow timely invites to be sent we can often plan a clinic based upon AstraZeneca (which we have in the fridge with a long shelf life), and then at the last minute if we get a delivery of Pfizer (with shorter shelf life) we switch the clinic to use this, and then repeat the process, organising another date for the AZ vaccine in the fridge. This allows us to run more clinics when the supply is sometimes variable, and also give as much advance notice as possible to patients.
Which leaves the inevitable question of why the hell there is no wider oversight of the deliveries to ensure that Pfizer vaccines are not sent to a centre on a day that they have planned an AZ day?
3
In reply to Dave Garnett:It was always going to be the case that we needed to increase understanding before deploying a relativelly new vaccine technology. It's rather sad that the best we can manage is a feeble attempt to dismiss peoples concerns by patronising them. I'm sure that those who are quite simply looking for an excuse to avoid any vaccine will find an excuse regardless. For the rest of us, doctors have to earn our respect and the process of earning respect will sometimes involve working with patients rather than just telling them what to do.
> Really? Do you have any idea of how the logistics work? How many people would you need to contact, and what are you offering them? That it's OK for them to refuse a particular vaccine, based on minimal understanding of the differences between them, on the assumption we can come back another day and offer them a different one?
> Realistically, you'd simply be offering people an excuse not to be vaccinated based on a empty choice that the vast majority of them wouldn't even understand. If ever there was a time for a bit of old school doing what the doctor tells you, this is it.
8
In reply to mick taylor:
If your religion requires modest clothing then rolling up your sleeve in the middle of a sports centre in front of everybody will be problematic for some.
I wonder if they need a bit more publicity about privacy and language such as availability on request of a room with closed door, injection by somebody of same gender, availability of interpreter.
Hopefully vaccination rates with continue to rise and equalise with time.
Post edited at 11:45
In reply to marsbar:
> Do we actually have accurate figures?
> On one of the other threads it appear than not everyone has been asked their ethnicity.
> Given the possibility that Covid risk is due to or correlated with ethnicity this is concerning.
I have been vaccinating at weekends, every 2-3 weeks. Somewhere between January and February, the online form was updated to include a question about ethnicity.
In reply to timjones:
> For the rest of us, doctors have to earn our respect and the process of earning respect will sometimes involve working with patients rather than just telling them what to do.
Well, my experience is that that's exactly what doctors do. However, we're in a bit of a hurry just now, what with tens of millions of people to get vaccinated, twice.
What more do you need to know that would help you decide that you'd rather do the socially responsible thing, rather than making excuses for superstition, ignorance and worse?
3
1
In reply to timjones:
Its interesting reading the JCVI summary on who should be vaccinated next. In a pandemic it looks like getting the jabs into the most people who are likely to be hospitalised in the most efficient way is the No1 priority.
This means interest and minority groups ( because that can slow down the process of vaccinations as they have to be deliberatley targeted and given priority) are moved to one side for the sake of the overall objective of the wider population so to speak.
So your wish for a choice of which vaccine issue is basically ignored, compared with the overall science of getting vaccines into as many arms as possible very efficently.
It is literally a numbers game, get jabs in arms and fast.
Probably also ties in with the issue that ( as I understand it) any vaccine centre must be able to as a minimum vaccinate 1000 people a week (this includes community pharmacists)
Post edited at 12:27
In reply to neilh:
That 1000 point is not strictly true as otherwise anyone immobile at home couldn't be vaccinated, nor could care homes or residential homes for those with disabilities. The people who do this vaccination work are often independent of the main vaccination centres. GPs are tasked to look at the new priories on risk groups who were mistakenly (on the actual risk data) overlooked in the first round, the reason why JCVI priorities changed. What the latest JCVI decision really means is age is prioritised over those in employment where social distancing is difficult or sometimes impossible. From a point of view of combined risk factors of catching covid and ending up in hospital or of catching covid and of spreading it, I think that is a difficult decision but possibly another mistake. They could have prioritised any higher risk employees in that age group who can't always socially distance first.
In reply to Kalna_kaza:
> I am still struggling to understand how someone with a lifetime distrust of the NHS / white authority figures etc would still rather risk a slow painful death to which they are especially susceptible to over a quick injection.
They may believe the virus isn't real. They may believe the vaccine isn't effective so why risk contact with the authorities. They may believe something even madder: the vaccine is a tracker or mind control serum or sterilising them...
People believe weird stuff. Isolated small groups reinforce madder and madder ideas until they're both totally normal within the group and utterly inexplicable when viewed from without.
> I'm not disagreeing with your points made, it just seems ludicrous so many people would put themselves in harm's way.
Most will believe by doing so they're staying out of harm's way.
jk
Post edited at 13:34
In reply to Offwidth:
> They could have prioritised any higher risk employees in that age group who can't always socially distance first.
That would just end up in a total bun fight with every employment sector/individual employer claiming that they should be prioritised before others.
2
In reply to elsewhere:
> If your religion requires modest clothing then rolling up your sleeve in the middle of a sports centre in front of everybody will be problematic for some.
> I wonder if they need a bit more publicity about privacy and language such as availability on request of a room with closed door, injection by somebody of same gender, availability of interpreter.
> Hopefully vaccination rates with continue to rise and equalise with time.
Good points and I guess the vaccination centres that are targeting specific groups will do what’s needed in that regard (no evidence they are, but I reckon they will).
In reply to timjones:
> For the rest of us, doctors have to earn our respect and the process of earning respect will sometimes involve working with patients rather than just telling them what to do.
Being bright enough and putting in the work to get into uni to study medicine. Being bright enough and dedicated enough to stick out a 5 year degree course. Actually passing and registering as a doctor plus all the post grad training on top.
Doctors already have my respect ta very much
4
1
In reply to elsewhere:
It's not the middle of a sports centre, there are screens, and ladies have scarves for modesty if they are worried. It could be an issue for a small number of Muslim women, but it wouldn't be for any I know. Most British Muslims are quite sensible and practical about these things.
2
In reply to Becky E:
Thanks for clarifying, that probably explains why some were asked and done not.
1
In reply to neilh:
> Its interesting reading the JCVI summary on who should be vaccinated next. In a pandemic it looks like getting the jabs into the most people who are likely to be hospitalised in the most efficient way is the No1 priority.
> This means interest and minority groups ( because that can slow down the process of vaccinations as they have to be deliberatley targeted and given priority) are moved to one side for the sake of the overall objective of the wider population so to speak.
> So your wish for a choice of which vaccine issue is basically ignored, compared with the overall science of getting vaccines into as many arms as possible very efficently.
> It is literally a numbers game, get jabs in arms and fast.
> Probably also ties in with the issue that ( as I understand it) any vaccine centre must be able to as a minimum vaccinate 1000 people a week (this includes community pharmacists)
If I was being cynical I might fall into the trap of thinking that it is also about allowing the government to make grandiose claims about the number of people that are being vaccinated. My wife somehpw managed to get our joint email address added onto the Conservative Party mailing list and we regularly get rip-roaring, backslapping emails proclaiming that they are doing a marvellous job and that xxxxxxx people have now been vaccinated.
I wonder whether my post would have been less unpopular if I had blamed Boris and his cabinet for the lack of choice
1
In reply to Offwidth:
> That 1000 point is not strictly true as otherwise anyone immobile at home couldn't be vaccinated, nor could care homes or residential homes for those with disabilities. The people who do this vaccination work are often independent of the main vaccination centres.
Not correct: GP networks have vaccinated residents & staff at their care homes, and housebound patients, out of the general allocation of vaccine doses. We have to record whether it's being given at the vaccination hub (usually a GP practice site, but sometimes a church hall, community centre, etc) or at the care home / patient's home.
In theory it was possible to ask other providers to vaccinate the housebound, care homes, etc, but I don't know where that's been done in practice - it hasn't been done in Sheffield. I think the logistics and organisation would have taken too long and in the end it was easier to just take a few vials to the care home and get on with it.
5
In reply to Dave Garnett:Given that we don't have enough Pfizer vaccine to cover tens of millions of people twice it surely can't be a huge issue if some people would prefer the other vaccine?Have you ever considered a career in sales, I'm sure that the tactic of accusing people who were unsure about your product of being superstitious, ignorant or worse would reap huge rewards.
> Well, my experience is that that's exactly what doctors do. However, we're in a bit of a hurry just now, what with tens of millions of people to get vaccinated, twice.
> What more do you need to know that would help you decide that you'd rather do the socially responsible thing, rather than making excuses for superstition, ignorance and worse?
2
In reply to Stichtplate:
> Being bright enough and putting in the work to get into uni to study medicine. Being bright enough and dedicated enough to stick out a 5 year degree course. Actually passing and registering as a doctor plus all the post grad training on top.
> Doctors already have my respect ta very much
It was probablyunfair to allow myself to get drawn into commenting on the respect that Doctors deserve when it would be more accurate to say that I've seen a bit too much dodgy work by research scientists over the years to automatically trust their work.
3
In reply to timjones:
> Have you ever considered a career in sales, I'm sure that the tactic of accusing people who were unsure about your product of being superstitious, ignorant or worse would reap huge rewards.
Actually, I did do sales for a few years and was pretty good at it. But I'm not selling, or arguing a legal case, or directly addressing the vaccine sceptics here, and I have the luxury of saying what I think.
Edit: Ok, I'll bite about the dodgy scientists. What's that all about?
Post edited at 15:26
2
In reply to Offwidth:
Have the JVCI not been clear that the high risk group is based on age? There is no scientific evidence to support vaccinating employee groups in other words.That is ceratinly the way it is being put across....by the scientists.
The 1000 point is just something that I heard on the radio, you have a valid point there.
2
In reply to timjones:
Bit too twisted that one.The vaccine programme was always part of the pandemic planning predating Johnson.People tend to forget that.
In reply to neilh:
There is plenty of evidence, just like there was when JVCI changed their minds twice before when repeatedly presented with it: on multiple risk factors giving high vulnerability and on severe learning disabilities. It's not just about risk evidence though, its a complex balance of risks to the individual, risks of spread, overall speed of progess and state functions not becoming too compromised because too many key employees get sick or self isolating.
In reply to neilh:
Easier to forget pandemic planning eh, given what the government did with cygnus?
1
In reply to Becky E:
I know that Becky, my point is in using the word 'strictly' is that the service provision does travel to the person sometimes, out of necessity and that does slow things down: however, you can't leave behind a large number of the most vulnerable.
Post edited at 16:17
2
In reply to timjones:
> It was probablyunfair to allow myself to get drawn into commenting on the respect that Doctors deserve when it would be more accurate to say that I've seen a bit too much dodgy work by research scientists over the years to automatically trust their work.
Fair enough, but docs and research scientists are different animals and as a rule of thumb people have to work to lose my respect. Respect is pretty much my starting point.
1
In reply to Offwidth:
I doubt Oxford would have turned out a vaccine so quickly with out the planning.......some of it was wrong, but some of it was spot on.Its a mixed picture as you well now.
1
In reply to neilh:
The best part of the planning was independent of government and before they even got involved. Scientists and entrepreneurs in Oxford, starting in Jan 2020, coordinated research planning, arranged significant seed funding and were thinking through the likely manufacturing partners and delivery planning. The government side did well but benefitted greatly from the 3 month head start.
1
1
In reply to Offwidth:
I think you will find that the catapult centre in vaccines was planned well before then. This was part of that planning.
1
In reply to neilh:
That's true. Hardly covid planning though.
1
In reply to timjones:
> It's rather sad that the best we can manage is a feeble attempt to dismiss peoples concerns by patronising them.
We can address those concerns by effectively communicating the evidence that all those available are safe and effective. We don’t, however, have to bend over backwards to pander to every baseless worry someone has.
> doctors have to earn our respect and the process of earning respect will sometimes involve working with patients rather than just telling them what to do.
Agree that working with people is the better approach. However, that doesn’t mean “do whatever the patient wants regardless of your medical opinion or trivial things like actual availability of a treatment/vaccine”.
As a healthcare professional my aim is to work collaboratively with a patient at all times. However, if they were dead set against the evidence-based treatments available then there does come a point where the choice is simply “come back if you change your mind”. There is a finite amount of time I can justify spending with someone who doesn’t want the help I am able to offer when I have a waiting list full of people who do.
The current situation is different in some ways to normal practice, but making the vaccination programs slower, more costly, and more wasteful because of unevidenced concerns helps no-one.
6
I've not read the whole thread but I was slightly surprised that, given a significant ethnic minority population, here in Coventry we've had highest percentage of over 70 s that have been vaccinated. ( Over 95 per cent.)The reasons for an apparently lower uptake among BAME populations must be complex and seem to differ from one city to another.
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
Yes it's complex. Its also true that the most ethnically diverse areas of London (and Leicester) have about double the BAME percentage of Coventry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_districts_by_ethnicity
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...