Coronavirus

[Tombwfc]

1 hour ago, birch-chorley said:

Not sure that makes sense, we are currently in our second lockdown after having a period of relative normality in between. Think most people are now of the opinion that shorter lockdown to nip spikes in the bud would have worked better 

Besides, If the reports are to be believed then the most vulnerable will have been vaccinated and have immunity by the end of January (on a sliding scale from early December). On top of a huge Winter Flu vaccination programme the risk of the NHS collapsing should now be extremely small (huge numbers of these vaccines would have to fail). This was all about stopping the NHS collapsing after all, with that now almost in reach we should be looking at a pathway out of restrictions back towards normality in line with the roll out of the vaccination programme 

By the time Xmas comes around the most vulnerable will be immune. It’s fair enough to ask the rest of the vulnerable group to adhere to say tier 3 restrictions (don’t go to restaurants, gyms, hair dressers etc) for a few more weeks until they get their immunity whilst the non vulnerable enjoy some more freedoms 

 

 

While that might be what you'd do, I'm not sure that plan bears any relation to what the government are thinking. Just this morning Hancock said we'd be looking at normality after Easter, rather than Christmas.

Every indication is that a period of lax restrictions over Christmas while then have to be followed up by tighter ones again in January. I don't see how that can be justified, for the sake of one day.

[Traf]

Extend the current conditions by a fortnight and re-assess the position on the weekend of 12th/13th.

The question has to be "If it wasn't Christmas, would we be lifting restrictions?" If the answer is no, then we go on as we are.

[stevieb]

1 hour ago, DaisyHWanderer said:

Possibly 90% when administered as a half dose then a full 2nd dose. Certainly still great news.

Sample size 131 people...

Still. Pfizers was only 94 people. 

[radcliffe white]

Amateur sports reportedly back on the 2nd

great news 

[birch-chorley]

36 minutes ago, Tombwfc said:

 

While that might be what you'd do, I'm not sure that plan bears any relation to what the government are thinking. Just this morning Hancock said we'd be looking at normality after Easter, rather than Christmas.

Every indication is that a period of lax restrictions over Christmas while then have to be followed up by tighter ones again in January. I don't see how that can be justified, for the sake of one day.

Tier 1 or 2 isn’t normality is it, I don’t think anyone has said go back to pre Covid life before Spring 

Kid yourself it’s 1 day all you want, for the economy it’s much much bigger than that, especially in the economic sectors hardest hit thus far, it really is make or break for many of them 

It’s fair enough asking those in the vulnerable groups to adhere to tier 3 for a few more weeks whilst those that aren’t vulnerable adhere to Tier 1 or 2 (dependant on local circumstances). I’m sure the majority of the vulnerable wouldn’t mind if it means protecting the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of families 

 

[Mounts Kipper]

This Astra Zeneca/ Oxford uni vaccine sounds fantastic, 90% success with 1/2 dose then full dose, meaning we can vaccinate more folk, doesn’t need the low temperatures to be transported, and priced at a cup of coffee rather than £15-£20 that the other vaccines cost. Fantastic result by the look of it. 👏👏👏

[Ani]

36 minutes ago, stevieb said:

Sample size 131 people...

Still. Pfizers was only 94 people. 

Was it really ? Or is that the number of people who got infected ? 
 

Thought the trial was 20000 people and the numbers you are quoting are the % that got infected ? Comparing the results across that many people is different to saying the sample size was 131. 

[Ani]

1 minute ago, Mounts Kipper said:

This Astra Zeneca/ Oxford uni vaccine sounds fantastic, 90% success with 1/2 dose then full dose, meaning we can vaccinate more folk, doesn’t need the low temperatures to be transported, and priced at a cup of coffee rather than £15-£20 that the other vaccines cost. Fantastic result by the look of it. 👏👏👏

Twice today you and I are in agreement. If we avoid each other on the politics threads we could become friends. 👍👍😘😘🥳🥳

[Spider]

4 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

This Astra Zeneca/ Oxford uni vaccine sounds fantastic, 90% success with 1/2 dose then full dose, meaning we can vaccinate more folk, doesn’t need the low temperatures to be transported, and priced at a cup of coffee rather than £15-£20 that the other vaccines cost. Fantastic result by the look of it. 👏👏👏

Indeed.

The only hurdle will be the legions of anti-vaxxers who in most cases (I know it's a genuine physical impossibility for some) are just being cunts for social media likes.

My arm is available anytime. Stamp my passport (Blue or purple) and let's get back in the stadium

[Mounts Kipper]

3 minutes ago, Ani said:

Twice today you and I are in agreement. If we avoid each other on the politics threads we could become friends. 👍👍😘😘🥳🥳

I’m swinging away from Boris at the moment so it might be sooner rather than later, that’s only if you stop moaning about Brexit. 🤣😂🤣

[Zico]

26 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Tier 1 or 2 isn’t normality is it, I don’t think anyone has said go back to pre Covid life before Spring 

Kid yourself it’s 1 day all you want, for the economy it’s much much bigger than that, especially in the economic sectors hardest hit thus far, it really is make or break for many of them 

It’s fair enough asking those in the vulnerable groups to adhere to tier 3 for a few more weeks whilst those that aren’t vulnerable adhere to Tier 1 or 2 (dependant on local circumstances). I’m sure the majority of the vulnerable wouldn’t mind if it means protecting the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of families 

 

it seems fair

unfortuantely it's impractical and, for want of a better word, impossible, as it will be left to the subjective nature of the individual as to whether they are vunerable or not

you'd inevitably end up with a spike

[Tombwfc]

21 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Tier 1 or 2 isn’t normality is it, I don’t think anyone has said go back to pre Covid life before Spring 

Kid yourself it’s 1 day all you want, for the economy it’s much much bigger than that, especially in the economic sectors hardest hit thus far, it really is make or break for many of them 

It’s fair enough asking those in the vulnerable groups to adhere to tier 3 for a few more weeks whilst those that aren’t vulnerable adhere to Tier 1 or 2 (dependant on local circumstances). I’m sure the majority of the vulnerable wouldn’t mind if it means protecting the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of families 

 

 

It doesn't really matter how fair you think it is... it's not happening. 

What's best for everyone is to not have the virus circulating widely. Better for the economy, better for the lives of people who who'll be dead. Give everyone a long bank holiday at the end of January when cases are right down.

[Zico]

1 minute ago, Tombwfc said:

 

It doesn't really matter how fair you think it is... it's not happening. 

What's best for everyone is to not have the virus circulating widely. Better for the economy, better for the lives of people who who'll be dead. Give everyone a long bank holiday at the end of January when cases are right down.

aye, maybe it's me being naive or simplistic

but this is the sequence of events:

 

1) Natural Spread of Virus

2) Cases

3) Hospitalisations

4) Deaths

5) Excess Deaths

6) Long Covid

 

if at any point you want numbers in 2-6 to come down, you have to effectively control step 1 and kill it's chances of getting to step 2

whether it's protecting the NHS, or saving the economy, you have to do a good job at step 1 - opening up for a week for piss ups and christmas shopping may help the economy in the very short term, but allowing greater numbers to increase in steps 2-6 is no good short term of the NHS, or medium term for anyone, as it will just lead to more restrictions

countries that are reporting low to no cases didn't fuck about at step 1, short term pain, long term gain

any country that is half arsed at step 1 inevitably ends up spinning plates trying to keep everyone happy, and when you do that, plates smash

[birch-chorley]

11 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

it seems fair

unfortuantely it's impractical and, for want of a better word, impossible, as it will be left to the subjective nature of the individual as to whether they are vunerable or not

you'd inevitably end up with a spike

It’s not ‘impossible’ at all 

Certainly as easy as the Tier system, for a while here we Leyland, Chorley and Standish within a few miles of each other all under different restrictions.

Quite simple really, open X, Y and Z businesses and ask anyone over 65 or who has pre existing conditions not to go in them until they have completed their vaccination in a few weeks  

Once the vaccination programme starts we could live with a spike in positive cases if it’s in the younger / less vulnerable groups as they are much less likely to lead to hospitalisations / deaths 

[birch-chorley]

23 minutes ago, Tombwfc said:

 

It doesn't really matter how fair you think it is... it's not happening. 

What's best for everyone is to not have the virus circulating widely. Better for the economy, better for the lives of people who who'll be dead. Give everyone a long bank holiday at the end of January when cases are right down.

It doesn’t matter what me or you think to be fair, it’s a Democratic decision for all 60M+ of us, represented by our MP’s in Parliament 

I doubt their will be appetite to extend this lockdown for another 8 weeks to the end of January (which would need parliamentary approval) whilst a vaccination programme is in play 

Half of those at risk of dying will have immunity by Xmas (weighted by risk i.e over 80’s) 

[Zico]

20 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

It’s not ‘impossible’ at all 

Certainly as easy as the Tier system, for a while here we Leyland, Chorley and Standish within a few miles of each other all under different restrictions.

Quite simple really, open X, Y and Z businesses and ask anyone over 65 or who has pre existing conditions not to go in them until they have completed their vaccination in a few weeks  

Once the vaccination programme starts we could live with a spike in positive cases if it’s in the younger / less vulnerable groups as they are much less likely to lead to hospitalisations / deaths 

it might be if you assume that the only vunerable ones are over 65

but the obese, asthmatics, diabetics etc are all vunerable too

and are you going to ID check everyone as they go somewhere to prove they are over / under 65?

[birch-chorley]

3 minutes ago, ZicoKelly said:

it might be if you assume that the only vunerable ones are over 65

but the obese, asthmatics, diabetics etc are all vunerable too

and are you going to ID check everyone as they go somewhere to prove they are over / under 65?

I wouldn’t ID anyone, it’s about asking them to adhere, the vast majority will. Just like with regional lockdowns, nothing is stopping people travelling to another town for X, Y & Z but you’d hope they won’t 

At the end of the day if someone who’s vulnerable decides to fuck the request off then it’s up to them, they are putting themselves at risk first and foremost, I’m sure most are sensible enough. We shouldn’t be taking such extreme measures for everyone based on a small % of the vulnerable deciding they don’t want to adhere to government requests 

[wiggy]

Sadly this isn't just about the "vulnerable". Good friend's sister is currently in intensive care with Covid. Mid 40s and previously healthy, her family were told on Friday that it was unlikely she would survive. She's still in danger but thankfully things are looking more hopeful. My best man's wife and daughter both had positive tests over the weekend. And this is whilst we are supposedly in lockdown. Doesn't take a genius to see what will happen if everyone is given the OK to celebrate Christmas 'normally'.

[Ani]

1 hour ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I’m swinging away from Boris at the moment so it might be sooner rather than later, that’s only if you stop moaning about Brexit. 🤣😂🤣

Ok if you swing on Boris and assume you are realising Trump was a bad horse to back we are a good deal on Brexit away from it. 

[bolton va va]

My guess is that lockdown will be followed by a few weeks on a beefed up tier 3, but with the carrot of a 4/5 day relaxation over christmas........not necessarily because it's the best way to go, but because everyone knows that plenty will ignore the guidelines over xmas anyway.

[birch-chorley]

28 minutes ago, wiggy said:

Sadly this isn't just about the "vulnerable". Good friend's sister is currently in intensive care with Covid. Mid 40s and previously healthy, her family were told on Friday that it was unlikely she would survive. She's still in danger but thankfully things are looking more hopeful. My best man's wife and daughter both had positive tests over the weekend. And this is whilst we are supposedly in lockdown. Doesn't take a genius to see what will happen if everyone is given the OK to celebrate Christmas 'normally'.

Whilst of course very sad I thought the total number of deaths under 65 without pre existing conditions are very small? I think @boltondiverhad them at a few hundred. 

As a % of that total group it’s an incredibly small risk, more in line with many other day to day risks 

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

2 hours ago, Ani said:

Was it really ? Or is that the number of people who got infected ? 
 

Thought the trial was 20000 people and the numbers you are quoting are the % that got infected ? Comparing the results across that many people is different to saying the sample size was 131. 

It was the number of people in the trial who tested positive. Some of which will have had the vaccine,the majority of which won't. No hospitalisations or severe cases of Covid were reported amongst those who received the vaccine.

Half dose,full-dose is reportedly 90% effective, whereas full-dose/full-dose is reportedly 62% effective.

23,000 participants have taken part in the trial to date.

[wiggy]

Numbers of deaths amongst those under 65 certainly appear to be thankfully small, but any admissions are still taking up valuable NHS resource. Fill the hospitals, even with people who end up surviving, and there is bound to be a knock on effect. People I know working in the NHS say that they are extremely stretched. And way beyond what they would normally expect for this time of year.

I get that people are desperate for time with their families, but my fear is that rather than celebrate "sensibly", a lot of people will see this as an invitation for the mother of all blow outs. If the vaccine is genuinely as close as is being suggested that I would have thought the best present we could all give each other this year, is a bit more patience.

[mickbrown]

4 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Grannies don’t have to go for Xmas dinner, the point is you have the option to go or not to go and rightly so. Time government stopped telling us how to live our life’s. 

You might have a point if we weren't a nation of thick twats.

"See granny for Xmas, bury her in the new year."

Not sure it's worthy as a John Lewis Xmas campaign tagline

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

You might have a point if we weren't a nation of thick twats.

"See granny for Xmas, bury her in the new year."

Not sure it's worthy as a John Lewis Xmas campaign tagline

“How do you know that it’ll be her last Christmas, Mum?”