When will this shit end?

[Fuzzy Afro]

What the hell does “social distancing” even mean?

 

If it means we can go the pub as long as we stay 1m away from other tables and wear a mask to go for a piss, so be it.

 

If it means we are legally banned from meeting people indoors then I’m not going to be following that. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

Just now, steviewevie said:

Maybe, hopefully, that will be the case....but the worry is hospitals may still be stretched, and variants may be an issue. We just don't know yet.

How can hospitals be stretched after the vulnerable are vaccinated? Only a very tiny percentage of young people attend the hospital with covid-19

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Keyser Hancock Soze.

I feel like it's got to the stage now where they are subtly mocking us right to our faces.

[zahidf]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

What the hell does “social distancing” even mean?

 

If it means we can go the pub as long as we stay 1m away from other tables and wear a mask to go for a piss, so be it.

 

If it means we are legally banned from meeting people indoors then I’m not going to be following that. 

According to the Times, granny still can't hug the grandkids 'just in case'

[efcfanwirral]

33 minutes ago, Paul ™ said:

And not even guaranteed you can get out to excercise as will depend on the hotel staff.. making them prison officials by default 🤨 

 these hotel staff have to get loads of abuse and probably catch the virus from people quarantining all for minimum wage. England summed up right there. 

The quarantine actually has no enforcement at all if its them enforcing it. 

20 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It's not they are even saying full lockdown, all they are saying is some restrictions might have to be in place, which is what some have been saying all along. 

The word restrictions = no mass gatherings. If masks are needed, then the perceived risk is still there - it'll never be JUST masks. And the death of our beloved music industry and the arts, so even if (big if) they are allowed to come back any time soon, there won't be anything left. 

That presumably government briefed Times article even speculating about social distancing for all of 2021 is so far from festivals being allowed that it all but confirms that they won't be happening.

Edited February 11, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[stuartbert two hats]

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

If we've got the vaccine and people aren't dying whats the point?

 

Like this briefed to the times is bullshit. They want grandparents to not hug their grandkids AFTER they're vaccinated? Ridiculous.

The reason is because the AZ vaccine, whilst it may cut transmission is definitely not sterilising and if you're vaccinated, you can still be a transmission vector. Whilst sizable parts of the population - even relatively young people - are still unvaccinated, then dropping social distancing rules for those who are vaccinated runs the risk of yet another round of exponential growth of cases and deaths.

It might also be fine, the answer lies in a lot of maths and we don't yet know all of the numbers.

I've no idea if this adds up, the only way to know if it does is to literally do the maths. But I'm pretty sure this is the reason there's talk of restrictions for an extended period, even for the vaccinated.

[March Hare]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

How can hospitals be stretched after the vulnerable are vaccinated? Only a very tiny percentage of young people attend the hospital with covid-19

The spread of ages in intensive care is a lot wider than most expect. Only c.25% of beds taken up by those over 70.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

 these hotel staff have to get loads of abuse and probably catch the virus from people quarantining all for minimum wage. England summed up right there. 

The quarantine actually has no enforcement at all if its them enforcing it. 

The word restrictions = no mass gatherings. If masks are needed, then the perceived risk is - it'll never be JUST masks. And the death of our beloved music industry and the arts, so even if (big if) they are allowed to come back any time soon, there won't be anything left. 

That presumably government briefed Times article even speculating about social distancing for all of 2021 is so far from festivals being allowed that it all but confirms that they won't be happening.

Maybe its SAGE briefing the Times?

I dont see the Tory backbenchers going along with that rubbish when deaths are massively down.

[Guest]

The other issue that we just don't know what will happen, they don't want to risk opening everything up and getting rid of all social distancing just in case things don't work out. Ignore what then stories to the press are about it, but keep in mind they will most likely go slowly because they don't know what will happen.

[hodgey123]

So depressing. 

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

How can hospitals be stretched after the vulnerable are vaccinated? Only a very tiny percentage of young people attend the hospital with covid-19

so many are in there now and won't take much to push NHS to edge again, and they have a massive backlog of other stuff they need to do so need to reallocate resources.

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, March Hare said:

The spread of ages in intensive care is a lot wider than most expect. Only c.25% of beds taken up by those over 70.

That’s because most over 70’s aren’t suitable candidates for ICU. Only the healthier people in that age group would be it instead. Most of the remaining 75% are 50-69 and those people are being vaccinated in the near future.

 

It’s a total fallacy that the ICU’s are full of 31 year old millennials. 

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

The reason is because the AZ vaccine, whilst it may cut transmission is definitely not sterilising and if you're vaccinated, you can still be a transmission vector. Whilst sizable parts of the population - even relatively young people - are still unvaccinated, then dropping social distancing rules for those who are vaccinated runs the risk of yet another round of exponential growth of cases and deaths.

It might also be fine, the answer lies in a lot of maths and we don't yet know all of the numbers.

I've no idea if this adds up, the only way to know if it does is to literally do the maths. But I'm pretty sure this is the reason there's talk of restrictions for an extended period, even for the vaccinated.

We don't know if its sterilising.... but its most likely cuts transmission according to that leaked Sun report.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

The other issue that we just don't know what will happen, they don't want to risk opening everything up and getting rid of all social distancing just in case things don't work out. Ignore what then stories to the press are about it, but keep in mind they will most likely go slowly because they don't know what will happen.

If its 'give it a few weeks' that's fine. Not all bloody year when the death rate is low.

[March Hare]

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

That’s because most over 70’s aren’t suitable candidates for ICU. Only the healthier people in that age group would be it instead. Most of the remaining 75% are 50-69 and those people are being vaccinated in the near future.

 

It’s a total fallacy that the ICU’s are full of 31 year old millennials. 

Closer to 50% are between 50-69 and the remaining 25% under 50. Which is why the hospitals could still be stretched after initial vaccinations of the over 70s.

[Guest]

Just now, zahidf said:

If its 'give it a few weeks' that's fine. Not all bloody year when the death rate is low.

It will probably be longer past Easter through the Spring. 

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Maybe its SAGE briefing the Times?

I dont see the Tory backbenchers going along with that rubbish when deaths are massively down.

The same Tory backbenchers who were against the lockdown in the autumn?

[xxialac]

5 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

 these hotel staff have to get loads of abuse and probably catch the virus from people quarantining all for minimum wage. England summed up right there. 

The quarantine actually has no enforcement at all if its them enforcing it. 

Good point.

It's incredibly dark and disturbing having civilians policing how long other civilians are allowed to do some exercise or have a smoke.

Feel very sorry for the hotel workers, who didn't sign up to this.

[BobWillis]

4 minutes ago, March Hare said:

The spread of ages in intensive care is a lot wider than most expect. Only c.25% of beds taken up by those over 70.

How many have underlying health conditions and will be vaccinated in groups 1-9? 
What is the average BMI of those in intensive care? 
The idea that young healthy people are ending up in intensive care wards is nonsense. 

[stuartbert two hats]

5 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

How can hospitals be stretched after the vulnerable are vaccinated? Only a very tiny percentage of young people attend the hospital with covid-19

Because if we removed all restrictions (especially when case numbers are relatively high), then even though a smaller proportion of younger people develop serious disease, then with a sufficiently high cases rate, the serious disease numbers will become large.

People in their 40s might not get their second dose until autumn.

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

We don't know if its sterilising.... but its most likely cuts transmission according to that leaked Sun report.

briefed by those same tory backbencers?

[Mr.Tease]

14 minutes ago, zahidf said:

If we've got the vaccine and people aren't dying whats the point?

 

Like this briefed to the times is bullshit. They want grandparents to not hug their grandkids AFTER they're vaccinated? Ridiculous.

Why don't we just wait and see what the actual proposals are and what the reasoning and timeline is before freaking out-

I don't want to spend another year not being able to have my family round to stay over any more than you do, but at the same time I don't think it fair to say 'once I'm Vaccinated I'll do whatever I like' (and I say that as someone who's been vaccinated), if that means other people get shafted/get ill/die. I don't think you do either, you just don't think restrictions will be necessary. So let's wait and see what the reasoning is first. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, March Hare said:

Closer to 50% are between 50-69 and the remaining 25% under 50. Which is why the hospitals could still be stretched after initial vaccinations of the over 70s.

And most of that 25% will have underlying health conditions and therefore be on the priority list.

[BobWillis]

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Because if we removed all restrictions (especially when case numbers are relatively high), then even though a smaller proportion of younger people develop serious disease, then with a sufficiently high cases rate, the serious disease numbers will become large.

People in their 40s might not get their second dose until autumn.

Does the second dose not increase protection against infection rather than protection against severe disease? 
 

Ive lost track of what’s what any more. 

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Because if we removed all restrictions (especially when case numbers are relatively high), then even though a smaller proportion of younger people develop serious disease, then with a sufficiently high cases rate, the serious disease numbers will become large.

People in their 40s might not get their second dose until autumn.

And what's the death rate for 40s from it? Probably a lot lower after one dose as well.

Anyway, as I've said, people went along with lockdowns to stop mass deaths. If deaths go down, then they aren't going to agree to be locked in their houses not getting close to their loved ones.

 

We were promised an end point to this, nd now the geeks are trying to keep us locked in longer 'just in case'

Edited February 11, 2021 by zahidf