Spread of Covid, will vaccines stop it, will you get vaccines forever?

[cromwell]

Hang on a minute.

All that I am trying to say is that I do not believe a child of ten fully understands enough to give what in law is defined as "informed consent" which requires a degree of understanding of what is being proposed and the harm it might cause.

I'll ask Moira what the family court tribunals think...

Oh, by the way, you do know the EU's 'Ooman Rights buggers said the trial against the Bulger killers was unfair as they couldn't possibly have understood stood it ....

John I'm not saying all aged ten are capable, some obviously are but the medics do the assessment.

Tbf John there are people of ages 18 onwards who I wouldn't expect to decide the difference between night and day........and they don't have a learning disability.

[johnofgwent]

Are you seriously telling me John the Bulger killers at 11 years old didn't know they were committing murder?

Hang on a minute. 

All that I am trying to say is that I do not believe a child of ten fully understands enough to give what in law is defined as "informed consent" which requires a degree of understanding of what is being proposed and the harm it might cause.

I'll ask Moira what the family court tribunals think...

Oh, by the way, you do know the EU's 'Ooman Rights buggers said the trial against the Bulger killers was unfair as they couldn't possibly have understood stood it ....

[cromwell]

Are you SERIOUSLY telling me you are happy that a ten year old is able to give "informed" consent to a medical procedure ...

Are you seriously telling me John the Bulger killers at 11 years old didn't know they were committing murder?

[johnofgwent]

Well she doesn't need to persuade you John as it stands it's her GP.

Are you SERIOUSLY telling me you are happy that a ten year old is able to give "informed" consent to a medical procedure ...

[cromwell]

Well, the issue i see is pretty straightforward

Melissa may be the most intelligent mathematician in her class despite her August birth date making her the youngest, and her IQ probably exceeds her great great grandfathers because it sure as hell outguns mine, but you're never going to persuade me she has enough of a grip on molecular biology to give her informed consent to what is basically little more than her uncles experimentation .....

Well she doesn't need to persuade you John as it stands it's her GP.

[johnofgwent]

That's as maybe John but if you are able to determine that murdering someone is wrong then I'm  damn sure you're able to determine  if you want a vaccine.

And I'm afraid you're wrong on under 16 John,if they are deemed competent then they can decide for themselves and if they ask it be private then parents are not informed.

https://www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/0-18-years/making-decisions

Well, the issue i see is pretty straightforward

Melissa may be the most intelligent mathematician in her class despite her August birth date making her the youngest, and her IQ probably exceeds her great great grandfathers because it sure as hell outguns mine, but you're never going to persuade me she has enough of a grip on molecular biology to give her informed consent to what is basically little more than her uncles experimentation .....

[cromwell]

No I'm not having that

The age of criminal responsibility in the UK is a legal nicety specifying an age BELOW which the law deems them too immature to know right from wrong.

The age at which they are legally able to take responsibility for their own medical treatment is 16. Same as the age of consent.

That's as maybe John but if you are able to determine that murdering someone is wrong then I'm  damn sure you're able to determine  if you want a vaccine.

And I'm afraid you're wrong on under 16 John,if they are deemed competent then they can decide for themselves and if they ask it be private then parents are not informed.

https://www.gmc-uk.org/ethical-guidance/ethical-guidance-for-doctors/0-18-years/making-decisions

[johnofgwent]

Yes it is if they are over the age of criminal responsibility then they're old enough to decide

No I'm not having that

The age of criminal responsibility in the UK is a legal nicety specifying an age BELOW which the law deems them too immature to know right from wrong.

 The age at which they are legally able to take responsibility for their own medical treatment is 16. Same as the age of consent.

[Scott777]

It's not the same as jumping off a cliff or cutting themselves. Good parenting would see to all of these things and make advice in every respect.

Am I happy that teachers are encouraging vaccinations supporting the government line against the JCVI decision? Not really.

In absence of long-term trials, I don't know if the 'vaccines' are any safer than jumping off a cliff or self-mutilation.  But the principle is whether teachers have any place to tell kids what risks to take, when they don't need to take it.

[Scott777]

I don't have a perverse dislike of such treatments at all. I have been under medical supervision and regular testing been taking eight supplements for some time.
Care is needed when taking supplements because some of them undermine or negate prescription medication.

What I do dislike are anti-vaxxers.

Yeah, I think if big pharma tell you that a cheaper, more tested treatment will undermine their own profitable medication, you should definitely trust them.  😁  If I find any anti-vaxxers, I will let you know.  Personally, it's the experimental 'vaccines' that worry me, but when I find people against all the other vaccines, I will send you a hit list, so you can electrocute them.

[Barry]

Correct, and what kids do past the age of criminal responsibility and choose to be vaccinated is their business and not a mob who think they know better.

Also for those younger it's parents choice and nobody else's business is it?

Its also the same for those who are adults and make their respective choices.

Children in their teens are certainly competent to make their own informed decisions about any medical treatment they need. It should come with good advice and the balance of risks. The JCVI decided against recommending the jab and the government went ahead, so it's not a cut and dried decision. The JCVI suggested the risks of the jab outweigh the risks of the virus in that age group.

It's not the same for kids.  I hope you don't think it's the business and free choice of kids (12-15) to mutilate themselves, or commit suicide.  I would hope you would persuade them otherwise.

I think that is an unfair comparison. As explained above the risks are closely similar with the jab / infection scenario.
It's not the same as jumping off a cliff or cutting themselves. Good parenting would see to all of these things and make advice in every respect.

Am I happy that teachers are encouraging vaccinations supporting the government line against the JCVI decision? Not really. 

[papasmurf]

Why do you have such a perverse dislike for treatments which are not vaccines?  😁

I don't have a perverse dislike of such treatments at all. I have been under medical supervision and regular testing been taking eight supplements for some time. 
Care is needed when taking supplements because some of them undermine or negate prescription medication. 

What I do dislike are anti-vaxxers.

[Thomas]

Dr Raghib Ali MD(Epi) MPH MSc(Epi) MA DLSHTM FRCP

@drraghibali

·
4h

As those us who supported step 4 in July said at the time, an 'exit wave' was inevitable and it was better to have it before the Winter. That higher level of immunity we gained is now preventing the surges we are seeing in many European countries.

[Thomas]

Neil Ferguson says it's 'unlikely' Britain will need another lockdown because high case numbers since July have boosted the immunity of the population, i.e. everything is going to plan.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10198017/Neil-Ferguson-says-unlikely-Britain-need-lockdown-like-Netherlands.html

[cromwell]

Your point is confusing.  First of all, protesters have nothing to do with personal choice.  They are not forcing or coercing anyone to do anything.  They are providing advice.  You can call it a mob as much as you like, but it's still just advice.

It's disgusting for a teacher to be indoctrinating kids into medical experiments, just as it's disgusting if a teacher advised kids to jump off cliffs to prove they are brave.  Protesters were simply providing advice that the jab is a bad idea.  Taking the jab can cause harm.  Not taking the jab cannot cause harm.  Covid might cause harm, although it's a negligible risk for kids, but it's not the absence of the jab that causes harm.  You are comparing two completely different things.

You're confused,yeah because you only see your argument......you're not worth the effort.