When will this shit end?

[Jcatley]

2 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

They're still debating amongst themselves what the roadmap will be plus it will be flexible depending on how circumstances change, so it's not worth freaking out about at this point

 

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

This is also true! We’ve seen a few different versions now haven’t we? These different ideas could be versions of the ideas they’ve had and potentially the final roadmap be a mix of all of them. 

I think both of these points are bang on, likely to be a lot of ideas to be floating about and it will be a mixture of them all. I imagine that dates will be fixed as a minimum, but are likely to be guided by numbers as we move along 

[gizmoman]

6 minutes ago, Leyrulion said:

This is sounds scarier/harder then it actually is. 

From 10,000 cases today with an R of 0.75 it'd take 8 cycles of the virus to get cases to 1,000 a day. 

Or about 40 days, which takes us to about 28th March. Which is roughly in line with the other leaked timetables.

And if they increase testing? they can keep this going as long as they want if they use "cases" as the metric, the original justification for lockdown was to prevent the NHS being unable to cope, that is the only valid reason, there have been warnings throughout this of the desire for social control re: vaccine passports and they were ridiculed, it's not so crazy now is it?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Jcatley said:

 

I think both of these points are bang on, likely to be a lot of ideas to be floating about and it will be a mixture of them all. I imagine that dates will be fixed as a minimum, but are likely to be guided by numbers as we move along 

That’s what I hope, certainly with the dates. If the data shows rises then push the date of that period back and keep communication up through the briefings. 

[BobWillis]

3 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

And if they increase testing? they can keep this going as long as they want if they use "cases" as the metric, the original justification for lockdown was to prevent the NHS being unable to cope, that is the only valid reason, there have been warnings throughout this of the desire for social control re: vaccine passports and they were ridiculed, it's not so crazy now is it?

I don’t think they’ll increase testing. It appears operation moonshot is back on the agenda but the majority of these tests will replace pcr testing as Lateral flow testing is cheaper. 

[Jcatley]

Just now, Ozanne said:

That’s what I hope, certainly with the dates. If the data shows rises then push the date of that period back and keep communication up through the briefings. 

It’s the only logical way, we can’t promise something when it’s unknown (see Christmas). But I am hoping with the vaccine rollout being successful that we should keep way ahead of expected case numbers/hospital admissions/deaths and be able to proceed with a safe reopening in the time frame set out Monday 

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, zahidf said:

And rhe evidence is that oxford prevent serious illness even in the SA variant. It's not not the case that 'it doesn't work' like you said.

is there much evidence for this? Haven't they just trialed it on younger people?

[hodgey123]

Goalposts moved from deaths and hospitalisations to case levels and protecting against hypothetical, potential variants very quickly. It is something I don’t agree with at all as the fight against the possibility of hypothetical variants is something that is potentially never-ending, and ultimately futile given how porous our borders are as we all know! And to be fair, even if they weren’t porous, there is still a risk of a variant creeping in in the medium/long term future as we can’t control how the rest of the world deals with outbreaks. 

[gooner1990]

6 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It’ll be on the roadmap I would imagine but hasn’t been in any leaks I’ve seen. I think indoor mixing might be a little way off though. 

I think that’s what most people are hoping for is to go to each other’s homes again.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

is there much evidence for this? Haven't they just trialed it on younger people?

There's on study after one dose with 2000 people which says it may not give as many anti bodies. And that study hasn't been released for peer review....

I'm... dubious 

[steviewevie]

5 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

And if they increase testing? they can keep this going as long as they want if they use "cases" as the metric, the original justification for lockdown was to prevent the NHS being unable to cope, that is the only valid reason, there have been warnings throughout this of the desire for social control re: vaccine passports and they were ridiculed, it's not so crazy now is it?

Yeah, you and Trump were right all along.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, gooner1990 said:

I think that’s what most people are hoping for is to go to each other’s homes again.

Well.... its unenforceable.  So most people are probably making their own risk assessment on that 

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

Goalposts moved from deaths and hospitalisations to case levels and protecting against hypothetical, potential variants very quickly. It is something I don’t agree with at all as the fight against the possibility of hypothetical variants is something that is potentially never-ending, and ultimately futile given how porous our borders are as we all know! And to be fair, even if they weren’t porous, there is still a risk of a variant creeping in in the medium/long term future as we can’t control how the rest of the world deals with outbreaks. 

Yeah.... I think we should go by deaths and hospitalisations rather than cases as well. At the very least, case percentages as against testing rather than number of cases.

[duke88]

2 minutes ago, gooner1990 said:

I think that’s what most people are hoping for is to go to each other’s homes again.

But I literally never go round my friends’ houses, only time I see them is at the pub!

[zahidf]

• The Mail can also reveal that office staff are expected to be told to keep working from home when the Prime Minister unveils his roadmap. He is not expected to set a firm date for when employees should return to their desks, meaning that the ‘work from home if you can’ message will continue for the foreseeable future.'

   

[stuartbert two hats]

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

is there much evidence for this? Haven't they just trialed it on younger people?

There's not. There is good theoretical reason to believe it will work to prevent serious disease, but we don't know. Plus the trial that showed the low efficacy in preventing symptomatic disease was seriously flawed.

[Mr.Tease]

7 minutes ago, zahidf said:

And rhe evidence is that oxford prevent serious illness even in the SA variant. It's not not the case that 'it doesn't work' like you said.

I meant that it looks like it doesn't work vs mild to moderate (sorry for the lack of clarity, it's been a long day of work) illness, which isnt great as I was hoping it would so we wouldn't have to worry about vaccinated people transmitting it (which in turn would mean the risk of the other variant spreading or become more prevalent than it now would be reduced). 

Still awaiting data as far as I'm aware regarding serious illness, unless I've missed it (which I may have!). Even if it doesn't prevent that, it's not game over, we can still ease some restrictions over summer, but it would necessitate greater caution until an updated Oxford vaccine got a rollout in autumn (or the other vaccines were available) and careful monitoring of the prevelance of the variant. 

[august1]

If they are desperate to have this as the last lockdown, it makes sense to get cases as low as possible in tandem with the vaccine rollout.

Also gives them more wiggle room to open up quicker with less virus knocking about.

[stuartbert two hats]

1 minute ago, august1 said:

If they are desperate to have this as the last lockdown, it makes sense to get cases as low as possible in tandem with the vaccine rollout.

Also gives them more wiggle room to open up quicker with less virus knocking about.

Exactly. If we get the deaths low, but allow cases to skyrocket, then that will eventually lead to lots of deaths again if not enough people are vaccinated (that's at least 3 weeks since 1st dose).

Patience, motherfuckers.

[gooner1990]

5 minutes ago, duke88 said:

But I literally never go round my friends’ houses, only time I see them is at the pub!

I want my mother to cut my hair (she used to be a hairdresser) as I look like I should be in the Beatles 😂

[hodgey123]

2 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Exactly. If we get the deaths low, but allow cases to skyrocket, then that will eventually lead to lots of deaths again if not enough people are vaccinated (that's at least 3 weeks since 1st dose).

Patience, motherfuckers.

On what basis though as the most vulnerable will be vaccinated? Of course, if by allow to sky rocket you mean completely abandon all restrictions to say February 2020 levels then I agree the sheer weight of infection would probably lead to increased deaths and overwhelmed hospitals, but that isn’t what is being suggested by anyone I don’t think. 

[Mr.Tease]

15 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

is there much evidence for this? Haven't they just trialed it on younger people?

This is the last thing I read about it

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/e9bbd4fe-e6bf-4383-bfd3-be64140a3f36

Though I may have missed something since then. Just did some googling and this seems hopeful that as Oxford is similar to the Johnson's one, and the Johnson's one was effective vs serious illness, then hopefully the Oxford one will be too- no idea how accurate that is though:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/covid-vaccine-weekly-why-astrazeneca-vaccine-received-who-backing-even-as-south-africa-paused-rollout-154861

[stuartbert two hats]

5 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

On what basis though as the most vulnerable will be vaccinated? Of course, if by allow to sky rocket you mean completely abandon all restrictions to say February 2020 levels then I agree the sheer weight of infection would probably lead to increased deaths and overwhelmed hospitals, but that isn’t what is being suggested by anyone I don’t think. 

I'm not sure what's being suggested, but statements like "cases don't matter" are flat wrong when there are still many millions not vaccinated.

[efcfanwirral]

"July with social distancing" means social distancing is with us until summer 2022 surely? With maybe an August lifting perhaps, putting it back in when schools return in September ahead of winter? 

[Fuzzy Afro]

5 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

"July with social distancing" means social distancing is with us until summer 2022 surely? With maybe an August lifting perhaps, putting it back in when schools return in September ahead of winter? 

How on earth do you deduce that?

[hodgey123]

5 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

"July with social distancing" means social distancing is with us until summer 2022 surely? With maybe an August lifting perhaps, putting it back in when schools return in September ahead of winter? 

This is another concern I have, unless the government, after being extremely cautious reopening and over the summer, then decide to throw caution to the wind and see how we get on without social distancing, with full schools, in winter (which clearly won’t happen).