Almost 15% Of English Health Service Workers Remain Unvaccinated
Reports are emerging that many health service workers in England are refusing the vaccine, as the numbers coming forward to receive a Covid jab have fallen significantly over the past couple of weeks. But despite (or, perhaps, because of) an ongoing Government consultation into making Covid vaccinations mandatory for care staff (which would likely extend into other health-related fields), opposition to coercing staff in this manner appears to be growing. The Guardian has the story.
Nearly 15% of health service workers in England remain unvaccinated, and the numbers coming forward for a jab have decreased sharply in the last two weeks, NHS figures have revealed, prompting concerns that many frontline staff are refusing the vaccine.
But health leaders, patients’ groups and unions have been quick to dismiss any suggestion of mandatory vaccinations after it emerged that Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary, had embarked on a plan before the pandemic to make flu vaccinations compulsory for NHS staff.
The latest figures show that only 6,259 NHS staff in England had their first dose in the seven days before April 11th, down from 11,483 the previous week and substantially lower than the average of 22,985 per week during March. Now 190,697 workers out of 1,378,502 directly employed by the NHS remain unprotected against the coronavirus, four months after they became eligible for vaccination. The figures do not include agency workers, and will include some under-45s who are not frontline staff and are still waiting their turn.
Some NHS trusts would like to introduce mandatory vaccination because they believe efforts to persuade remaining staff are a distraction from other important tasks such as tackling the enormous waiting lists that have grown during the lockdowns.
Lesley Watts, the Chief Executive of Chelsea and Westminster Hospital Foundation Trust, wrote to other NHS trusts with a draft letter to staff saying Covid vaccination would be mandatory. After the letter was leaked, Watts said there was “no intention to mandate vaccination of our staff”, but did not explain why the letter was written or distributed.
Hancock was a strident critic of anti-vaxxer movements before the pandemic, and told a fringe meeting at the Conservative party conference in 2019 that he favoured making vaccinations compulsory for all childhood diseases. He then asked civil servants at the Department of Health and Social Care to work out how to make flu vaccines mandatory for NHS staff. The DHSC did not say if the proposal was still being considered.
In perhaps the biggest intervention on the question of mandatory vaccination for health service workers yet, the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) – which has a membership of 450,000 registered nurses – said in a statement released on Friday that health and social care staff should not be “coerced” into having a Covid vaccine.
Like the wider population, health and care staff are a diverse group and there are both physical and societal barriers for some on the take up for the vaccine.
The RCN do not support staff being made or coerced into having the vaccine. Staff vaccination should not be used as part of staff contracts, it should not be a condition of employment or part of employment contracts, linked to terms and conditions of employment or to pay.
The RCN do not believe that this approach is effective in improving uptake of vaccination in staff. The RCN recommend that all organisations have a proactive approach and make sure their staff have easy access to the vaccine within the working day. Staff should also have access to support with the right information, encouragement and clear explanation of the benefit and value of the vaccine. These measures will help to achieve a high vaccine uptake.
The Guardian’s report is 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.
Perhaps they’ve been put off by some of the “extremely rare” side effects.
perhaps they’vs already had covid19.
That’s a big perhaps.
Not really. Plenty of people have had it, especially NHS staff.
A significant proportion of NHS staff have had Covid, plus their families, with only a few suffering medically significant symptoms, however they have been leaned upon very heavily to get vaccinated, with only a few having the character and good sense to resist.
I understood that every scientific experiment requires some sort of control group in order to validate the results: a placebo in place of the real vaccination/gene therapy for example.
I have volunteered to be a member of that control group so I do not wear a mask and I will not have the jab.
I’m pleased that there are so many health workers in the same control group as me.
Hmm, I get your point (and understand you are kidding, of course), BUT would anyone actually trust this government/NHS to stick to their side of such a bargain?
She’s not kidding – I have never worn a mask, socially distanced, or had the jab, and there are plenty of us who are serious about this. None of us know anyone of our ilk who has been ill.
Anyone in the medical profession administering coerced vaccines without conveying the information of the ~<1% benefit involved is breaking accepted ethical standards.
Large trial show most of the vaccines create almost 100% in relative risk reduction of hospitalisation or death, not 1% that’s jusr a bare faced lie.
Very hard to reduce the risks of an infection from a virus which has not been proven to exist. But keep on drinking the Kool-Aid, it’s obviously working for you.
Oh dear. An ignoramus strikes – what government depends on : ignorance. You’d best keep your mouth shut in sensible company if you don’t know the difference between relative risk and absolute risk. Hint : 90% of bugger all is …. bugger all. … or you could educate yourself by reading around (start with articles about this basic bit of statistical knowledge). Here’s an abstract (already posted) from a technical paper on the issue re. Covid : “Relative risk reduction and absolute risk reduction measures in the evaluation of clinical trial data are poorly understood by health professionals and the public. The absence of reported absolute risk reduction in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials can lead to outcome reporting bias that affects the interpretation of vaccine efficacy. The present article uses clinical epidemiologic tools to critically appraise reports of efficacy in Pfzier/BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccine clinical trials. Based on data reported by the manufacturer for Pfzier/BioNTech vaccine BNT162b2, this critical appraisal shows: relative risk reduction, 95.1%; 95% CI, 90.0% to 97.6%; p = 0.016; absolute risk reduction, 0.7%; 95% CI, 0.59% to 0.83%; p < 0.000. For the Moderna vaccine mRNA-1273, the appraisal shows: relative risk reduction, 94.1%; 95%… Read more »
OK, then they’ll just do it your way if you insist (like Boris does ) that the vaccine doesn’t work, so it will be the Boris/RickH way: longer hard lockdown…. or perhaps you’ll get the message in the end .. but what will it cost ? You and your chums, Boris and Matt, say the vaccines don’t work, so the alternative for you is more lockdown, you fool.
That’s the virus petering out, due to the magic of vaccine, you gormless chump. Vaccine, not lockdown, did that, with a little help from the weather. Innumerate mugs like you are just useful idiots for Boris and co, you love more lockdown, harder, longer. We get the message.
You really are ignorant and gullible, aren’t you, fonzi (of 77th Brigade?) You look at a curve, and fail to notice that the same shape applied during last April’s peak when there were no vaccines. You also fail to notice that is the usual seasonal pattern for respiratory viruses. In actuality, the better fit is with increased initial deaths related to the introduction of ‘vaccines’. On this basis, you make wild assertions of causality at what isn’t even very good in impressionistic correlation terms. I think it’s it’s idiots such as yourself who align with Boris, not those of us with a bit of knowledge and nous. The fact is that both lockdowns and vaccines are an irrelevance to what is a political problem, and won’t go away just because you have your tongue up Big Pharma’s arse, who conned government into buying oceans of useless experimental snake oil. I note that you’ve made absolutely no attempt to grasp the hard data (above your pay/intelligence grade, I guess) and the simple actual risk reduction calculations behind them. Sorry you bought into the myth – but hey-ho, people as dim as you will always be a mark for the con. Get… Read more »
I am surprised that the % unvaccinated is as low as 15%, but then I suppose there has been bullying, hysteria and peer pressure which affects the health sector as much or more than any other
Hopefully that is an underestimate, and part of the propaganda plan
“Almost 15% Of English Health Service Workers Remain Unvaccinated”
Good. At least some of the people working in the NHS are cautious, as opposed to the 85% of reckless people who want to be the subject of a mass clinical trial of an experimental medicine without even bothering to find out that’s what it is.
One wonders if they saw the results of the vaccine in their patients
“benefit and value of the vaccine”. Will they also have the risks explained (and by people not influenced by the pharmaceutical industry)?
Presumably the mad dash to punish those who do not take the vaccine is because of worry about asymptomatic transmission. Just to be clear, is there any issue with asymptomatic transmission, and what is the evidence (preferably in layman’s terms)?
I’d be curious to know if any of those who’ve had the vaccine now regret it. I’d also be curious to know if that number was increasing?
If I’d had it in good faith that it was tested effectively only to learn of the fact it was still in phase three trials and that long term effects were unknown I’d be pissing my pants.
Give it another 6 months!
If you don’t want the vaccine, you shouldn’t be made to have it.
End of!
One senses a dismissive contempt for natural immunity as a consequence of actual infection, reinforced by changes to the WHO’s definition of herd immunity. This is perverse; for anyone sensitive to evidence of an agenda requiring routine universal vaccination as an operational prerequisite, it is also disturbing. In more normal times, natural immunity would be what M. Hancock might reference as “the gold standard”. Vaccination would offer an alternative and highly effective route to an induced form of immunity for those for whom actual infection itself might be risky. We could have an open discussion about what’s best for individuals and thus, on aggregation, for the population as a whole. Sir Simon Stevens might want to talk about “age based apartheid” while others reminisce about attending chickenpox parties. Experience suggests that a health worker who has been exposed to this virus, been ill and has recovered, would not then need to be vaccinated. My understanding is that evidence from those in this position with respect to SARS are seen to retain robust immunity 17 years later. This is good news. We need not forget that we have immune systems and perhaps ought to be willing to trust them better! If… Read more »
Why would anyone who,has stood up,close and personal with this plandemic go onto to take an experimental biological with no long term safety and efficacy data.