Tom Penn on the treatment of the elderly and the covid jab mandate for care home workers
Once again it is the vulnerable elderly of society – those whom we have been commanded to protect by brutalising our self-governance; whilst they decompose alone in their holding cells – who continue to bare the brunt of Government’s pseudo-humanitarian crusade to restructure life.
By November 11th all care home workers must have received both stabs otherwise they will lose their jobs. And they have already commenced what the Establishment have repugnantly named their 16 week ‘Grace Period’; wherein they must choose between tampering with their genetics, immune systems – and even risking death – in exchange for a paycheque, OR preserving the dignity of bodily-autonomy but at the cost of crippling the household income. Thank you Sajid Javid, Your Grace.
Yet despite the vaccine’s inability to totally prevent infection or block transmission, and despite acknowledgement of its rapidly waning efficacy; despite the appalling Yellow Card Scheme and VAERS statistics – which we know are only the tip of the iceberg – and the fact that clinical safety trials are far from complete, it is still being peddled as the one and only route back to ‘normality’.
Granny and Grandad are already double-jabbed, and therefore as ‘protected’ now as they could possibly be from developing a more severe case of Covid-19 (banned alternative therapies notwithstanding). So if a care worker’s vaccination would still not prevent them from passing on the virus, then why therefore is it compulsory?
Is Uncle Fester the Health Secretary really saying this: that care home staff must be fully vaccinated in order to hopefully prevent their OWN hospitalisation, so that they will therefore miss fewer shifts safeguarding fully vaccinated residents – using a substance that therefore cannot be said to be a vaccine – as we gradually transition into the increased pressures of winter, and the flu season?
We know that common sense left the building over 18 months ago. It now appears to have emigrated permanently from Cuckoo-Land Britain. Focused protection? Looks more like blind destruction to me.
If we take a look at Government’s own risk assessment of the mandatory inoculation policy – its ‘Statement of Impact’ paper, dated July 19th 2021  – as always we can see nary a mention of the disastrous implications for the very people the measures have supposedly been designed to save.
Outlined, we have an estimate of the number of workers the sector may lose due to vaccine insubordination: 40,000 out of a workforce of 570,000. We also have an estimate of the financial cost to care home providers: £100 million. And we have the expectation only, that local authorities will be equipped to manage the situation; with under-the-rug actions such as ‘relocating residents in the event of service closures.’
So easy on paper isn’t it, you Health and Social Care desk-diviners, to forecast no catastrophic fallout as consequence of another of your miscreant manoeuvres, from the sanctuary of London HQ. One wonders how YOU might cope with a sudden relocation: to a downgraded life among strangers, living in a mouldy flat on a sink estate in Burnley – far away from your current settled and familiar environment – where you’d work cleaning the fryers in a 24 hour chippie, for example. Because that’s what enforced uprooting will feel like for an unsuspecting care home resident, even if such a move were to a similar facility a mere mile away.
Where are the statements concerning the REAL impacts? The psychological and physical collateral damage to the living agitprop of this forbidding agenda – the elderly? How numerous will be the casualties of this particular covidian-conflict, formulated to crush the frail and susceptible under the guise of patriotic duty?
According to the paper nobody need worry however, as apparently the loss of 40,000 care workers will not be a problem, as the approaching end of the furlough scheme ‘may result in a possible sudden increase in the size of the adult social care workforce entrant pool, helped further by the limited level of requirements necessary for those entering the sector.’
So rest easy Margaret and Cedric. Should the carers you have come to know and love choose self-determination over coercion, they will be replaced by skint people with little concern for your welfare; only loosely vetted by a care home manager desperate to refill vacant positions.
They won’t even require the basic qualification of interest in their new line of work, and will quickly harbour resentment at having to then fulfil an incredibly demanding and stressful role – requiring interpersonal skills they likely do not possess – for a slap-in-the-face £8.50 an hour.
But fear ye not, this shan’t affect the service you receive you lovable old dears: how could it possibly? The Inspectors shall offer a cast-iron guarantee on that.
Or as The Guardian recently reported, ‘an army of volunteers‘ may be needed to make up the shortfall in staff.
We’ve already had volunteers assisting the NHS in the ‘trenches’, volunteers helping to rollout the vaccination campaign, and brainwashed citizens volunteering their money to the likes of Captain Sir Tom; to likewise help prop-up a health service already funded by a proportion of their monthly incomes.
So what next? Volunteers staffing our under-manned care homes; helping to feed and wash the infirm whilst Top Brass continue pissing taxpayers’ money away down the drain of cripplingly-redundant pandemic strategies?
Pardon me for saying, and it’s perhaps a little beside the point, but in the olden days such people were called relatives. They pitched in with Nana’s care out of some sense of humanity and love; not so as to help mop-up the social-dysentery of control-hungry despots. Either way, they certainly weren’t required to down two test-tubes of bubbling, experimental chemicals before entering the building.
According to carehome.co.uk, the average weekly cost of living in a residential care home is £704, while the average weekly cost of a nursing home is £888 across the UK.  For that kind of money one would expect a level of attentive service akin to a long-term stay at the Ritz; not the half-arsed efforts of new, essentially unwilling recruits working at a run-down motorway hostel for truckers and prostitutes. Or volunteers squeezing in a quick hour of getting-in-the-way before rushing home to walk the dog in time for Strictly Come Dancing.
‘Protect the vulnerable’ they sombrely advised, as infected pensioners were sent from hospitals to care homes sans Covid test.
‘Shield the defenceless!’ they screamed, as they then tossed them into solitary confinement to rot away in fear, loneliness and dementia.
‘Don’t kill granny’ they tutted; instilling guilt into a populace then blamed for the inevitable, heart-breaking deaths of their own parents and grandparents.
‘Commence the destabilisation of the entire sector for the good of all’ they now pronounce, ‘and if it all goes wrong, it’ll be YOUR fault unvaccinated shit-heels.’
Toward the end of the Statement of Impact however, our crumbling old elders are offered a rainbow of hope in the form of an ‘unquantified’ but ‘fairly substantial and long lasting’ benefit: that of ‘reduced illness.’
There you go Betty and Percy: you have compassionately been afforded a reduced risk of hospitalisation from Covid-19, and in exchange, due to staff shortages, all other aspects of your care will be depleted – making you wish you were dead anyway.
Welcome to Broken Britain – shut up and eat your gruel.