Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Copperface said:

That's why there is a Government behavioural science strategy, and people trying to nudge the public along to accept such restrictions. You are the one blindly accepting some bits of what hey are saying.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/nudge-unit

Except if its too make me stick to restrictions, it isn't going to work past Easter if the death and hospitalisation rates go down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, zahidf said:

Except if its too make me stick to restrictions, it isn't going to work past Easter if the death and hospitalisation rates go down.

They probably won't care. But what you won't be able to do is attend an officially sanctioned mass gathering which would pose far more danger than someone deciding unilaterally to go to the park without a mask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

Ah yes, a realiable source...

You can also 'open up' the UK by staying in the current tier system. Nearly everything is open in tier 2 which means that areas will likely go down tiers if what they say on that front page happens which is what I've been saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

As has been said many times, it's in the global communities best interest to stop people mixing and mutating the virus further.

The government keeps restrictions until as late as possible imo - I reckon they will want at least 40% of the population done.

You think we're going to wait for about 26 million people to be vaccinated? Do we even have enough vaccine for that? 

The more people get jabbed the more.the government will have to start thinking about paying for everything - and that needs an functioning economy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

Booked a test tomoro ... precautionary but my year long cough has got slightly worse 😞 

Good luck mate, lets us know how it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, crazyfool1 said:

Yep will do 😒.. fucking shitting it ... as I went for a walk with folks yesterday 😞 

You had your mask on and it would've been outside. The risks are really low, but understandable you'd be worried!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

You think we're going to wait for about 26 million people to be vaccinated? Do we even have enough vaccine for that? 

The more people get jabbed the more.the government will have to start thinking about paying for everything - and that needs an functioning economy. 

Been going round in circles re this for many months. Restrictions are not all about lockdowns or Tier 4 levels.

https://www.efestivals.co.uk/forums/topic/234935-possibly-happening-in-september/?do=findComment&comment=5998015

https://www.efestivals.co.uk/forums/topic/234935-possibly-happening-in-september/?do=findComment&comment=5998069

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

so...is this not a factor in determining when can start easing restrictions completely, when we have more data on the effectiveness of these vaccines...still a lot of unknowns?

Vaccines will be ongoing like the flu vaccines though. If more evidence comes we need to give more people the jab, we will do that more easily by next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, incident said:

So the Telegraph says - "Ministers are looking at proposals to triple the length of time between taking a first and second dose from three weeks to 12 weeks, in order to speed up the delivery of the vaccine."

Aside from the very dodgy maths there, why the hell should Ministers even have input on that? It should be a medical decision and should be left for medical people to decide based on facts. Politicians should shut the fuck up on aspects like that.

I’d expect the next round of data from Oxford/AZ to be the US trial data (SD:SD)...(somewhere in the last few pages there was speculation that it might be more info on LD:SD, but they are only starting those trials, too early for that data)...however, there’s some subtle differences in the AZ US trial and the Oxford/AZ UK and Brazil trials (manufacturer of the doses possibly being a big one, remember, the LD:SD came about because of a manufacturing error that led to a dosing error)...anyway, the pause in the US trial meant they had a lot of participants with dose 1 and a big gap to dose 2...meaning they have way more data on when dose 2 needs to be given (and there was already a signal for flexibility in their lancet paper with some participants waiting 6 weeks but not seeing a drop in immunity or greater risk of infection)...I suspect with better quality vaccine (made by AZ themselves rather than Oxford or the Italian manufacturer that made the doses for the earlier trials) plus the big gap from the pause, they have robust data suggesting they can stretch it out to 12 weeks, at which point AZ plan to deliver 40m doses for the UK (so, dose 2 can be given then)...all pure speculation on my part, but seems plausible to me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Ha on both ends!

 

I'm no lockdown sceptic. I acknowledge the need for it when we need to control things. I'm just amazed that some people seem to want it past a point when restrictions will be worse than covid past mass vaccinations.

Like many millions of people, I very rarely interact with the elderly and vulnerable. If protecting them is literally all we are trying to do here, why I have I been in some sort of lockdown for nine months. I didn’t see a single vulnerable person or person over 60 for 8 months, nor did most of my mates- why were we not allowed to meet up?

99% of the measures I have dutifully followed during 2020 were basically an entire waste of time if I go out and get COVID in June.

Fundamentally, if the government wanted me to go get COVID rather than wait for vaccine, surely they’d have asked me to do so in March?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Copperface said:

I know - do you know think that restrictions e.g. reduced capacity, no fans at football etc.. have zero impacts on the economy? 

Less people in a restaurant or a cinema means less things sold which means less taxes. Which means less stock being bought. Which means less taxes.

The list goes on and on about how restrictions limit the viability of a business and they all come back to less taxes less people working means less spending etc... Etc... 

Restrictions lockdowns whatever it might be impacts the economy to various levels. Some sectors would argue restrictions are worse for them than actual lockdowns. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

18 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

Yep will do 😒.. fucking shitting it ... as I went for a walk with folks yesterday 😞 

 

16 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

You had your mask on and it would've been outside. The risks are really low, but understandable you'd be worried!

I agree with @Ozanne - from all we've learnt the chances are literally pretty much zero outside even without a mask, with one on you'll be completely fine 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Like many millions of people, I very rarely interact with the elderly and vulnerable. If protecting them is literally all we are trying to do here, why I have I been in some sort of lockdown for nine months. I didn’t see a single vulnerable person or person over 60 for 8 months, nor did most of my mates- why were we not allowed to meet up?

99% of the measures I have dutifully followed during 2020 were basically an entire waste of time if I go out and get COVID in June.

Fundamentally, if the government wanted me to go get COVID rather than wait for vaccine, surely they’d have asked me to do so in March?

The restrictions aren't really to stop you as an individual getting Covid - the government couldn't really give a toss if you get Covid or not - it's about if they can put you in hospital if you need it. 

Edited by RobertProsineckisLighter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

 

I agree with @Ozanne - from all we've learnt the chances are literally pretty much zero outside even without a mask, with one on you'll be completely fine 

Yep cheers and if I don’t have it ... I’ll be even finer 🙂 just being extra precautionary with a work colleagues test too ... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
    • Too good for the legends slot 
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...