Should the NHS refuse treatment for people that haven’t had the vaccination?

[The Ham]

many are still 'working from home' which sometimes gives rise to a rubbish service, and over long to reply

I suspect that's a poor excuse for many, chances are those with our service area the same ones which gave poor service previously.

From outside the company that I work for few could tell if we are in the office or at home, certainly not speed of reply to enquires or answering calls. Now we might be the exception, but I suspect that not and therefore my first paragraph.

 

[221129]

you can't go on holiday, unless it's within the UK

Errmm yes you can.

shops are still having daft one way rules

Some shops do. Most got rid a long time ago.

 

[LAX54]

Errmm yes you can.


Some shops do. Most got rid a long time ago.

Well, yes if you want to go to the Falklands or Singapore, maybe Iceland As for Shops, there are still a fair few in our area including Tesco Extra, B&Q, Sainsburys

I suspect that's a poor excuse for many, chances are those with our service area the same ones which gave poor service previously.

From outside the company that I work for few could tell if we are in the office or at home, certainly not speed of reply to enquires or answering calls. Now we might be the exception, but I suspect that not and therefore my first paragraph.

A Company called me this morning, after a lot of messages I had left, half way through making an appointment I could hear "Mummy, Mummy...." LOL

 

[londonteacher]

The issue with all of the restrictions is that, like with most things in life (an example on a different level altogether is the seats on the Class 700), are down to personal opinions.

A lot of people do want the vaccine because they are told of many benefits whereas on the other hand people do not want the vaccine because they don't believe it. We may never reach an agreed conclusion with both trains of thought and there is nothing to suggest that either side is wrong. Both sides of the argument have silly conspiracy theories such as Bill Gates putting a chip in people as a reason against vaccination and that vaccinations are the only way out of all of this as a reason for vaccination.

Some people do believe that restrictions should be in place for those who refuse the vaccine and others believe that there should definitely be no requirement to be vaccinated and subsequently no restrictions in place for these people. Again this is something that both sides will not ever agree on and there is no right or wrong answer.

Going slightly off-topic but we have had news reports stating that some plumbers and NHS workers will be required to be vaccinated. Whilst a requirement should never be in place, people should also have the right to choose to have their plumbing serviced or to be treated by the NHS by people who are vaccinated. Not everyone will agree with that, and I respect that and personally, I don't have a problem being treated by someone unvaccinated, but due to the media scare reports of the last year and a bit some people will feel cautious and have a right to be treated by a different person.

 

[87electric]

Going slightly off-topic but we have had news reports stating that some plumbers and NHS workers will be required to be vaccinated. Whilst a requirement should never be in place, people should also have the right to choose to have their plumbing serviced or to be treated by the NHS by people who are vaccinated. Not everyone will agree with that, and I respect that and personally, I don't have a problem being treated by someone unvaccinated, but due to the media scare reports of the last year and a bit some people will feel cautious and have a right to be treated by a different person.

That way lies insanity. Fear of death is one thing, but fear of living? This paints a horrible future path for humanity of distrust.

 

[DustyBin]

That way lies insanity. Fear of death is one thing, but fear of living? This paints a horrible future path for humanity of distrust.

Yes it’s not a road I want to see society go down.

@londonteacher, would you really be willing to see a two-tier society? It would set a very dangerous precedent and we’re already at the top of a very slippery slope in my opinion. For some things there really is a right and wrong answer, and history teaches us how badly this kind of thing ends.

 

[35B]

That way lies insanity. Fear of death is one thing, but fear of living? This paints a horrible future path for humanity of distrust.

If someone can reasonably be vaccinated against a serious transmissible disease, which they may spread just by doing their job, then why is it unreasonable to be concerned about my risk from their choosing not to be vaccinated?

 

[big_rig]

If someone can reasonably be vaccinated against a serious transmissible disease, which they may spread just by doing their job, then why is it unreasonable to be concerned about my risk from their choosing not to be vaccinated?

Because you yourself will have been vaccinated. So you’re either an anti-vaxxer or a neurotic, neither of which society revolves around. Wear a mask if it bothers you so much?

 

[Darandio]

If someone can reasonably be vaccinated against a serious transmissible disease, which they may spread just by doing their job, then why is it unreasonable to be concerned about my risk from their choosing not to be vaccinated?

Flu is a serious transmissable disease. Would you have demanded NHS staff and plumbers be vaccinated pre-2020? Thought not.

 

[35B]

Flu is a serious transmissable disease. Would you have demanded NHS staff and plumbers be vaccinated pre-2020? Thought not.

The question had never occurred to me. If such a requirement were to be effective given the nature and epidemiology of influenza, then possibly. Although I regard Covid as a significantly more serious disease given the range and nature of its symptoms.

Because you yourself will have been vaccinated. So you’re either an anti-vaxxer or a neurotic, neither of which society revolves around. Wear a mask if it bothers you so much?

You presume in both cases that those being served would have received and be able to benefit from the vaccine. Particular where health and care staff are concerned, that is a very questionable assumption given how many people are immune compromised and need healthcare services.

Personally, I also find the idea of a healthcare worker refusing to be vaccinated something of a red flag, even if the benefit is solely their own. It makes me wonder about their attitude to both medical science and the welfare of their patients.

 

[Bantamzen]

The question had never occurred to me. If such a requirement were to be effective given the nature and epidemiology of influenza, then possibly. Although I regard Covid as a significantly more serious disease given the range and nature of its symptoms.

You presume in both cases that those being served would have received and be able to benefit from the vaccine. Particular where health and care staff are concerned, that is a very questionable assumption given how many people are immune compromised and need healthcare services.

Personally, I also find the idea of a healthcare worker refusing to be vaccinated something of a red flag, even if the benefit is solely their own. It makes me wonder about their attitude to both medical science and the welfare of their patients.

Frankly that last statement is shocking. Who are you to judge people who work to save lives? Are you suggesting they should have every single vaccine going to satisfy your criteria for not red flagging? Again, shocking.

 

[High Dyke]

Absolutely not. I don't know why this idea of refusing people medical treatment is so popular, but it is very concerning.

That's a discussion I've had with my 83 year old mother. She's refused to have her vaccination as she's fed up of poking and prodding for various blood tests/medical procedures over a number of years. It's got to the point where it isn't worth trying to convince her of the benefits of being vaccinated.

 

[35B]

Frankly that last statement is shocking. Who are you to judge people who work to save lives? Are you suggesting they should have every single vaccine going to satisfy your criteria for not red flagging? Again, shocking.

As a patient, I rely on those treating me to follow a standard of care. If they decline that standard of care for themselves, that raises questions in my mind about where else they follow that standard of care - or not. So it is not specifically about whether one individual has or hasn’t had a vaccine, but the way that decision casts implications on their professional approach to their job.

Medicine has too many cases over too long of practitioners who have thought themselves both more expert than others, and too arrogant to be subject to the same rules as others. Whether that’s about vaccination, or which treatment protocols they follow, or obtaining consent, the self proclaimed heroes have tended to destroy lives, not save them.

 

[big_rig]

M

The question had never occurred to me. If such a requirement were to be effective given the nature and epidemiology of influenza, then possibly. Although I regard Covid as a significantly more serious disease given the range and nature of its symptoms.

You presume in both cases that those being served would have received and be able to benefit from the vaccine. Particular where health and care staff are concerned, that is a very questionable assumption given how many people are immune compromised and need healthcare services.

Personally, I also find the idea of a healthcare worker refusing to be vaccinated something of a red flag, even if the benefit is solely their own. It makes me wonder about their attitude to both medical science and the welfare of their patients.

More shifting of the goalposts. You were talking about your own risk. Not those of some hypothetical person who cannot take the vaccine, who you are using as a weapon to justify your attitude. But your risk. You have had the vaccine, so again as I state are either an anti-vaxxer who doesn’t trust it, or a neurotic. Neither of which are groups that society revolves around.

 

[35B]

More shifting of the goalposts. You were talking about your own risk. Not those of some hypothetical person who cannot take the vaccine, who you are using as a weapon to justify your attitude. But your risk. You have had the vaccine, so again as I state are either an anti-vaxxer who doesn’t trust it, or a neurotic. Neither of which are groups that society revolves around.

Perhaps I should have said “one”, not “I” - would that be better? It would have clarified my obvious intent that the question was about a hypothetical person, not specifically myself.

I am in my mid 40s, have had one jab with the second due in a week or so. I also have normal health and immunity, as do my family, which is why I’ve been entirely content to have tradesmen working in my house when required during the pandemic, following reasonable distancing protocols for theirs and my protection.

However, I know others who lack that protection - for example one friend on lifelong chemotherapy - for whom these are real concerns that need to be dealt with seriously.

 

[big_rig]

Perhaps I should have said “one”, not “I” - would that be better? It would have clarified my obvious intent that the question was about a hypothetical person, not specifically myself.

I am in my mid 40s, have had one jab with the second due in a week or so. I also have normal health and immunity, as do my family, which is why I’ve been entirely content to have tradesmen working in my house when required during the pandemic, following reasonable distancing protocols for theirs and my protection.

However, I know others who lack that protection - for example one friend on lifelong chemotherapy - for whom these are real concerns that need to be dealt with seriously.

“If someone can reasonably be vaccinated against a serious transmissible disease, which they may spread just by doing their job, then why is it unreasonable to be concerned about my risk from their choosing not to be vaccinated?”

This is clearly talking about ‘your’ risk. But now that is clear it is obvious you are using vulnerable people as a weapon to advance your poorly hidden extremist zero covid agenda. I would be ashamed to be so selfish given there will not be one other element of risk in life you think society should be shut down for to protect these people (who can get the vaccine anyway, so what more do you want...?)

 

[Jonny]

“If someone can reasonably be vaccinated against a serious transmissible disease, which they may spread just by doing their job, then why is it unreasonable to be concerned about my risk from their choosing not to be vaccinated?”

This is clearly talking about ‘your’ risk. But now that is clear it is obvious you are using vulnerable people as a weapon to advance your poorly hidden extremist zero covid agenda. I would be ashamed to be so selfish given there will not be one other element of risk in life you think society should be shut down for to protect these people.

I prefer to think of them as being egotistic rather than selfish - they want to be seen as "one of the ones" who made ^the world^ a supposedly better place, usually by their own distorted morals. If you think that someone can automatically become a threat simply by not following the rules without at least case-by-case justification then you have at best fallen into a mindset.

Perhaps I should have said “one”, not “I” - would that be better? It would have clarified my obvious intent that the question was about a hypothetical person, not specifically myself.

I am in my mid 40s, have had one jab with the second due in a week or so. I also have normal health and immunity, as do my family, which is why I’ve been entirely content to have tradesmen working in my house when required during the pandemic, following reasonable distancing protocols for theirs and my protection.

However, I know others who lack that protection - for example one friend on lifelong chemotherapy - for whom these are real concerns that need to be dealt with seriously.

Whilst your friend is unfortunate, perhaps it is good to keep in mind that there are now many effective treatments available should they be needed that may be of use in such cases, Indeed, the old cliché applies that the earlier it is seen to, the better the outcome. It is unfortunate, but not everyone can pander to them.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The fact of the matter is this, life must get back to normal, no ifs, no buts, no conditions, no further restrictions for the xyz variant, and certainly and most importantly no talk of a two tiered society!

If you want to get vaccinated do so, I’ll support your decision just like someone who chooses to get vaccinated should respect the wishes of someone who doesn’t want the vaccine.

I have decided to not get the vaccine, I am in my early 30s and in good health, I rarely get sick, I believe someone more vulnerable than I should get the vaccine before me.

 

[Cdd89]

I have decided to not get the vaccine, I am in my early 30s and in good health, I rarely get sick, I believe someone more vulnerable than I should get the vaccine before me.

I find that really hard to argue with. And is why I (of the same age and position as you) am almost a bit ashamed of having grabbed a vaccine. Why people my age think it is something to be proud of, I’ll never know.

 

[londonteacher]

Yes it’s not a road I want to see society go down.

@londonteacher, would you really be willing to see a two-tier society? It would set a very dangerous precedent and we’re already at the top of a very slippery slope in my opinion. For some things there really is a right and wrong answer, and history teaches us how badly this kind of thing ends.

No I wouldn't and I think you misunderstood my post where I set out arguments on both sides and not my opinion.

 

[DustyBin]

No I wouldn't and I think you misunderstood my post where I set out arguments on both sides and not my opinion.

I didn’t misunderstand it; I realise you weren’t expressing a desire yourself to implement a two tier society. To be clear, the point I was trying to make is that sometimes there is a right and wrong answer, and this is one of those occasions. Apologies for any confusion.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I find that really hard to argue with. And is why I (of the same age and position as you) am almost a bit ashamed of having grabbed a vaccine. Why people my age think it is something to be proud of, I’ll never know.

Don’t be ashamed of your own decision, you made a choice that felt right fit you, that’s fair enough and I support you

 

[yorkie]

The question had never occurred to me. If such a requirement were to be effective given the nature and epidemiology of influenza, then possibly. Although I regard Covid as a significantly more serious disease given the range and nature of its symptoms.

What does this even mean?

I think what you are actually saying is that Covid19 symptoms in an immunologically naive person are likely to be more serious than influenza symptoms in an individual who has prior immunity to influenza? If so, then of course this is stating the obvious.

I assume you are not suggesting that Sars-CoV-2 is a more serious virus to humans than various strains of the influenza virus family as if you were saying that, I would argue there is no evidence for that. There are numerous reasons why influenza is a difficult family of viruses for us to gain immunity against, for example the fact that - unlike Sars-CoV-2 - there are multiple strains and our immune systems are not as good at fighting strains other than the one originally encountered.

 

[Bantamzen]

Perhaps I should have said “one”, not “I” - would that be better? It would have clarified my obvious intent that the question was about a hypothetical person, not specifically myself.

I am in my mid 40s, have had one jab with the second due in a week or so. I also have normal health and immunity, as do my family, which is why I’ve been entirely content to have tradesmen working in my house when required during the pandemic, following reasonable distancing protocols for theirs and my protection.

However, I know others who lack that protection - for example one friend on lifelong chemotherapy - for whom these are real concerns that need to be dealt with seriously.

I have to say this is a strange argument to say the least. You do understand that even a common cold can be lethal to someone on chemotherapy right? I know, its what ultimately killed my father in law when he was having a second round due to leukemia. So are you suggesting that medical professionals must vaccinate for everything, even illnesses where none exist?

I will repeat my conclusions about your motives because I genuinely believe them. It seems to me that for all your stating that you want an end to restrictions, you seem grimly determined to talk down any discussion about lifting them. I don't understand why, I can only conclude that you have not been severely affected by them nor know anyone that has. My wife and I however have been affected, both financially because restrictions have had a huge impact on my wife's business, and I know lots of people who have lost jobs or are in serious financial difficulties as a direct result of restrictions. But they don't matter right, they will just have to wait until the data suits you, yes?

 

[35B]

What does this even mean?

I think what you are actually saying is that Covid19 symptoms in an immunologically naive person are likely to be more serious than influenza symptoms in an individual who has prior immunity to influenza? If so, then of course this is stating the obvious.

I assume you are not suggesting that Sars-CoV-2 is a more serious virus to humans than various strains of the influenza virus family as if you were saying that, I would argue there is no evidence for that. There are numerous reasons why influenza is a difficult family of viruses for us to gain immunity against, for example the fact that - unlike Sars-CoV-2 - there are multiple strains and our immune systems are not as good at fighting strains other than the one originally encountered.

I have to say this is a strange argument to say the least. You do understand that even a common cold can be lethal to someone on chemotherapy right? I know, its what ultimately killed my father in law when he was having a second round due to leukemia. So are you suggesting that medical professionals must vaccinate for everything, even illnesses where none exist?

I am saying that influenza is generally less serious than Covid and that, if it were seriously practical to use vaccination to limit transmission of influenza or other transmissible diseases, I would support mandation of those vaccines where the effect would be to prevent transmission to patients. I also acknowledge that, with current vaccines, the reality is that influenza vaccination is of limited effect due to the nature of the influenza virus.

I will repeat my conclusions about your motives because I genuinely believe them. It seems to me that for all your stating that you want an end to restrictions, you seem grimly determined to talk down any discussion about lifting them. I don't understand why, I can only conclude that you have not been severely affected by them nor know anyone that has. My wife and I however have been affected, both financially because restrictions have had a huge impact on my wife's business, and I know lots of people who have lost jobs or are in serious financial difficulties as a direct result of restrictions. But they don't matter right, they will just have to wait until the data suits you, yes?

You are right to the extent that I personally have been fortunate enough not to be personally economically affected by Covid; I have however seen it impact on colleagues and friends' jobs and livelihoods. However, my views on the importance of data are based on how important it is that, once restrictions are relaxed, they stay relaxed. We've tried the approach of ignoring things until they become so bad we can't ignore them any longer; I believe that to do more damage to businesses like that of your wife, and to do more damage to more people over longer.

It is also why I put great value on a vaccination strategy designed to deliver herd immunity and why, if asked about my teenage children being vaccinated, I will (subject to their ultimate right to choose) strongly back them being vaccinated.

 

[yorkie]

I am saying that influenza is generally less serious than Covid

But what does this actually mean? You are just repeating the same thing you said before. I refer you to my question above.

and that, if it were seriously practical to use vaccination to limit transmission of influenza or other transmissible diseases, I would support mandation of those vaccines where the effect would be to prevent transmission to patients.

Mandation to whom?

Vaccination does not prevent transmission, though it does severely reduce the possibility of it. What would you do if staff refuse?

Is the NHS so awash with staff at the moment, that they can afford to be so picky?

For the record I am totally for vaccination but I think that mandating it is not something that should be done lightly.

I also acknowledge that, with current vaccines, the reality is that influenza vaccination is of limited effect due to the nature of the influenza virus.

There are multiple types of influenza virus, and within each there are multiple strains.

I believe influenza is a more dangerous family of viruses to humans than Sars-CoV-2 and right now the only reason you think the latter is more 'serious' is purely because we have not yet built up similar levels of immunity against it.

You are right to the extent that I personally have been fortunate enough not to be personally economically affected by Covid; I have however seen it impact on colleagues and friends' jobs and livelihoods. However, my views on the importance of data are based on how important it is that, once restrictions are relaxed, they stay relaxed. We've tried the approach of ignoring things until they become so bad we can't ignore them any longer; I believe that to do more damage to businesses like that of your wife, and to do more damage to more people over longer.

The situation is very different now, thanks to the vaccine.

 

[35B]

The situation is very different now, thanks to the vaccine.

I hope so, but the uncertainty in the numbers makes me unwilling to bank that cheque just yet.

But what does this actually mean? You are just repeating the same thing you said before. I refer you to my question above.

There are multiple types of influenza virus, and within each there are multiple strains.

I believe influenza is a more dangerous family of viruses to humans than Sars-CoV-2 and right now the only reason you think the latter is more 'serious' is purely because we have not yet built up similar levels of immunity against it.

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether family x or y of viruses is more dangerous to humans. My observation is that SARS-COV-2 causes more serious symptoms in more people, with consequently higher death rates, than influenza does. In particular, it appears to act not just as a respiratory virus, but also to have significant effect on the vascular system. I am reluctant to opine on whether this is a function of the novelty of the SARS-COV-2 virus, or an inherent property of it; my risk assessment is based on the world today, not as - on which I agree with you - SARS-COV-2 becomes endemic and expsoure becomes more of a norm.

Mandation to whom?

Vaccination does not prevent transmission, though it does severely reduce the possibility of it. What would you do if staff refuse?

Is the NHS so awash with staff at the moment, that they can afford to be so picky?

For the record I am totally for vaccination but I think that mandating it is not something that should be done lightly.

In the context here, I see mandation as a condition of employment in all patient/client facing roles in health and social care - so beyond the NHS. I agree with you that it is not something that should be done lightly, but I tend to the view that it is currently pushed too little rather than too much. As for the impact at a time of staff shortage, I accept your concern. My view, stated previously, is that someone who refuses to follow the standard of care for those they look after is someone who is demonstrating a wilful disregard for the science governing that care, and who should therefore be a target for the regulatory bodies, not considered a regretted loss by their employer.

For clarity, by "refusal" in this context, I refer to someone who is able to receive the vaccine and declines to do so.

 

[VauxhallandI]

I hope so, but the uncertainty in the numbers makes me unwilling to bank that cheque just yet.

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether family x or y of viruses is more dangerous to humans. My observation is that SARS-COV-2 causes more serious symptoms in more people, with consequently higher death rates, than influenza does. In particular, it appears to act not just as a respiratory virus, but also to have significant effect on the vascular system. I am reluctant to opine on whether this is a function of the novelty of the SARS-COV-2 virus, or an inherent property of it; my risk assessment is based on the world today, not as - on which I agree with you - SARS-COV-2 becomes endemic and expsoure becomes more of a norm.

In the context here, I see mandation as a condition of employment in all patient/client facing roles in health and social care - so beyond the NHS. I agree with you that it is not something that should be done lightly, but I tend to the view that it is currently pushed too little rather than too much. As for the impact at a time of staff shortage, I accept your concern. My view, stated previously, is that someone who refuses to follow the standard of care for those they look after is someone who is demonstrating a wilful disregard for the science governing that care, and who should therefore be a target for the regulatory bodies, not considered a regretted loss by their employer.

For clarity, by "refusal" in this context, I refer to someone who is able to receive the vaccine and declines to do so.

Will you also then mandate the taxi driver who takes the staff member to work? Then surely the family members of the taxi driver?

It doesn’t end.

 

[35B]

Will you also then mandate the taxi driver who takes the staff member to work? Then surely the family members of the taxi driver?

It doesn’t end.

Perhaps not. But then I regard vaccination as primarily a matter of public health, not personal, so that doesn't cause me to lose much sleep.

 

[yorkie]

I hope so, but the uncertainty in the numbers makes me unwilling to bank that cheque just yet.

Your constant doubting of vaccination effectiveness is wearing thin.

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether family x or y of viruses is more dangerous to humans.

In other words, you made a claim, and are now realising you have no evidence to back it up.

My observation is that SARS-COV-2 causes more serious symptoms in more people, with consequently higher death rates, than influenza does.

Do you not think that may be due to the fact that Sars-CoV-2 was a novel virus introduced into an immunologically naive population, whereas influenza is a well established family of viruses to which we have already reached endemic equilibrium?

In particular, it appears to act not just as a respiratory virus, but also to have significant effect on the vascular system.

This is due to the lack of immunity which means the virus is able to spread beyond the respiratory area.

IF you are suggesting that this is not the case with influenza, the evidence suggests otherwise.

Pandemic H1N1 Influenza Infection and Vascular Thrombosis

During the summer and fall of 2009, we observed significant thrombotic events in patients infected with the pandemic H1N1 influenza A virus. A retrospective cha

academic.oup.com

During the summer and fall of 2009, significant thrombotic events were observed in patients infected with the pandemic H1N1 influenza A virus. In a retrospective chart review of 119 individuals admitted to the hospital with H1N1 virus infection, 7 patients (5.9%) were found to have experienced thrombotic vascular events...

I am reluctant to opine on whether this is a function of the novelty of the SARS-COV-2 virus, or an inherent property of it; my risk assessment is based on the world today, not as - on which I agree with you - SARS-COV-2 becomes endemic and expsoure becomes more of a norm.

We are already transitioning from the epidemic phase to the endemic phase due to both high levels of infection (antibody seroprevalence studies suggest this is much higher than the official figures) and the huge success of the vaccination programme in delivering vaccines that offer very high levels of immunity (much better than the influenza vaccines typically do) in the majority of the population.

In the context here, I see mandation as a condition of employment in all patient/client facing roles in health and social care - so beyond the NHS. I agree with you that it is not something that should be done lightly, but I tend to the view that it is currently pushed too little rather than too much. As for the impact at a time of staff shortage, I accept your concern. My view, stated previously, is that someone who refuses to follow the standard of care for those they look after is someone who is demonstrating a wilful disregard for the science governing that care, and who should therefore be a target for the regulatory bodies, not considered a regretted loss by their employer.

For clarity, by "refusal" in this context, I refer to someone who is able to receive the vaccine and declines to do so.

I am not particularly interested in debating this point with you as I do not fundamentally disagree with you; I agree that people in such environments should get vaccinated but I do not think either of us are in a position to state whether it should be made mandatory or not, and I would certainly exercise caution before stating such a mandate should be in place.

I also think that extremist views on one side will breed resentment and extremist views on the other. For example the more you state your views, which I and many others perceive to be authoritarian, the less agreeable I find myself to such views and the more I feel like pushing back against them.

While I believe in the effectiveness of the vaccines and the importance of people being vaccinated, I also see that people who state authoritarian views on such matters are not in any way encouraging those who are hesitant to get vaccinated; on the contrary such views actually dissuade people from doing so, and make people resentful, suspicious and doubtful.

I really don't understand what you are trying to say or achieve much of the time (indeed I believe you have a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues, despite posting as if you do).