Search results

@Phil Pascoe there is something wrong with your link, its saying I'm left of centre!

And there I was thinking even if we all put our heads together we, as a mere assortment of individuals who like to play with our wood, had no chance of solving the issue of the NHS or taxation of the super rich.....We've only gone and done them in one thread lads!! What an achievement, who's...

I wasn't making a comment on how to measure the efficacy of the NHS.

Wouldn't death be an indication of no health? You cannot have poor health if you are dead. Ergo one has to be alive to possess poor health. The longer we live the more likely we are to suffer poor health due to chronic or terminal conditions for longer periods. Leading us to my initial...

If your sole criteria for health is a heart that continues to pump blood.

I'd agree with 'long lived', not sure I would with 'much healthier'. I think would be an argument that there is more chronic illness now than ever, but there will be multiple different contributing factors involved in that, not least that the population if more long lived. And now I am...

Christ, this thread has gone off topic.... What should be remembered when considering the inception of the NHS is that it was assumed that improved access to healthcare would lead to a healthier population and subsequently a reduced burden on the NHS. What has unfolded over the past 76 years...

I'd assumed if the great Zuckerberg would bend over then there was little hope here! Stay strong brothers and sisters. Fight the man! ✊

Difficult to know if it then becomes comparing apples and oranges when looking at global figures. The very rough and ready figures I worked out were based on UK specific information available, by no means am I claiming they are facts, just what seemed a reasonable indicative figure. I would...

Need to try some of these as the design council mandated a salt pig next to the cooker and using a teaspoon doesn't feel right.

I suppose my thought on this is twofold. Firstly, is immunity binary and you’re either immune or you’re not? If it is, then are these drugs fulfilling their goals if they do not stop you from contracting a virus, or prevent illness caused by it? Secondly, wouldn’t the alternative to vaccination...

I fully agree cost and the continual need to deliver more cost effective healthcare is an inevitable fact of any modern society, but your comment of convenience and the populations apathy to looking after their own health may be precisely linked to the last 3 words of your sentence 'mostly-mild...

Clearly your work history gives you deeper understanding of the mechanism by which these drugs are supposed to work. I did some brief reading about the history of RSV and particularly vaccine development and read a bit about the vaccine developed in the 60s that ended up causing vaccine enhanced...

I think you're right. This is about trust in the system and whether people are able to accept a narrative without question. Both taking and not taking a drug may present inherent risk and if that decision is made based on trust or lack there of, the risks on either side are intrinsically linked...

Again, not a climate change sceptic. I fully believe and accept climate changes. As I believe I have previously said on here Jacob, you are not the man to change my opinion on anything main due to you style of discourse. In fact, I would be surprised if you have ever been able to change...

Ok...... Maybe to target a specific population that is the most high risk, potentially those with comorbidities that make them highly likely to present with severe illness? Running mass vaccination programmes means that governments are spending huge sums of money treating people who may never...

Yes I have as you can see if you read my original post. That climate has been changeable for millennia and has never been stable and that the first principle of the scientific method is to question what is held as fact........but this thread is not about climate science.

I'm not suggesting a choice should be taken away from people. My query is whether large scale vaccination programme for low risk illnesses are proportionate and whether these programmes primary benefit are to the drug manufacturers or public health.

I don't quite understand all the things in your post, but I do wonder whether creating new drugs and selling them as panaceas to governments for low risk illnesses is driven by money rather than public benefit. The drug in question here seems to have quite a low efficacy over a fairly short...

I'm not sure I understand this.