When will this shit end?

[zahidf]

 

[Fuzzy Afro]

7 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I think we might need to get even more vaccinated to do extreme things like filling stadiums.  Three weeks after everyone has had their second dose is after June sadly.  We'll get there, and this year.  

And we'll be able to do plenty of things by June, just not gathering people in crowds to shout.

The second dose isn’t the important one 

[DeanoL]

On 2/20/2021 at 10:03 AM, jparx said:

For me, 2021 has to be the end of this (with all the caveats over mutations etc). We have vaccines and we know they’re working. There seems to be odd comments with VERY low expectations for where we’ll be by the end of the year or even next summer. Our expectation has to be that this will be over, and masks being the only thing we may need to use. There’s no reason to think otherwise at this stage and that needs to be what we’re demanding at this stage. 

I agree with this, but also think it’s why we should open up slower.

There are broadly two schools of though here- we either look at NHS occupancy and usage and say right, let’s open up everything we can at a pace that keeps it at 95-99% - as long as it’s not overwhelmed. Second option is we try and push it right down first to 60-70% and then try and keep it there.

My issue with the first option is yes, we get back to “normal” quicker as long as you’re not working for the NHS or are waiting on none urgent medical interventions. But we also keep ourselves on the cliff edge. One new variant that looks to evade the vaccine even a little and we are smack back into lockdown because we can risk it- if hospitalisation from it go up we are of space. But if we push the numbers right down, there’s time to properly analyse it, see if the numbers really do go up, before we have to act.

22 hours ago, zahidf said:

I'm not a behaviour scientist on SAGE but imho once the over 50s and vulnerables are done by end of March/early April, then there are millions of families who will ignore this restriction and meet up (at least in gardens) and to hell with if it's three or four households technically.

People have had enough of this.

While I agree, I can also see that as an argument for not relaxing restrictions. Millions will do that stuff anyway, so to counteract it, the tens of millions who do obey the rules need to be under stricter restrictions to balance it out.

[Jack.194]

12 minutes ago, Hannibal Schmitt said:

This is nonsense. Pupils get tested here every few days and it works pretty well. Also the cases found in school are pretty low.

Yea I agree, it was a pain to set up but it’s a well oiled and working system now that it is set up.

That being said I work in a SEN school so pupils aren’t getting tested, just staff I imagine in a mainstream school it’s a lot harder.

We have had a lot more cases than I originally thought we would have though.

[BobWillis]

19 minutes ago, xxialac said:

On not this again...because if they re-open too much, too soon, it will lead to bad health outcomes.

And in my view having 90,000 people huddled together at Wembley stadium and on the way to Wembley Stadium by June 11 is too soon.  Not to mention that having good quality mass rapid testing by then is far from certain.

Maybe the 'taxpayer money' saving vast numbers of lives, allowing the NHS to start functioning fully again and allowing most of the economy to reopen by Summer could still represent good value for money? The argument put forward is pretty facile.

In your view. In my view large outdoor crowds present very little risk when prevalence is low as seen last summer with packed beaches and protests on the streets of Britain. That’s without vaccines and mass rapid testing. 

10 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I think we might need to get even more vaccinated to do extreme things like filling stadiums.  Three weeks after everyone has had their second dose is after June sadly.  We'll get there, and this year.  

And we'll be able to do plenty of things by June, just not gathering people in crowds to shout.

We don’t need everyone to be vaccinated, why does everyone keep falling for this line? We are not going for a zero covid approach. 
 

Over 50’s being jabbed will reduce deaths by 98%, hospital admissions by 86% and ICU admissions by 78%. 
A lot of those will have had their second dose by June, and a sizeable number of those aged 30-50 will have had a first dose. 
A lot of under 21’s will have already been exposed to the virus through school/college/university. 
The idea that we can’t enjoy a normal life in the country by that point while we wait for 18-30 year olds to be jabbed is over cautious insanity. 

 

[Crazyfool01]

Just a thought would restrictions for longer enable us to start making a hit into the horrendous backlog of stuff the nhs has to deal with going forward ... ? 

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, BobWillis said:

In your view. In my view large outdoor crowds present very little risk when prevalence is low as seen last summer with packed beaches and protests on the streets of Britain. That’s without vaccines and mass rapid testing. 

A beach cannot even begin to be compared to a 90,000 full Wembley stadium.

A full Wembley is rammed tube train after tube train, a walk up to the stadium where you're elbow to elbow and a huddle at *indoor* bars getting drinks at half time, heaving pubs and a lot of drunk people who lose their inhibitions.

I can only think you've forgotten what a packed mass event is like.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

They finally work out how to be cautious, just as the population changes its mind! 😄

 

I imagine YouGov will carry out some polling tomorrow that will show what the public think of the loosening, whether it’s fast or just about right etc. It’ll be interesting to see what the public’s mood is. 

[stuartbert two hats]

22 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

The second dose isn’t the important one 

We don't know that yet. We really don't. In terms of the vaccination programme being "complete", that means two doses to every adult. Over time it may emerge that you cut transmission that much more after the second dose. Or it might not, we'll have to follow the data as it emerges. But like Glastonbury, there's probably enough uncertainty to not plan in any extreme events like full stadia as early as June.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, xxialac said:

A beach cannot even begin to be compared to a 90,000 full Wembley stadium.

A full Wembley is rammed tube train after tube train, a walk up to the stadium where you're elbow to elbow and a huddle at *indoor* bars getting drinks at half time, heaving pubs and a lot of drunk people who lose their inhibitions.

I can only think you've forgotten what a packed mass event is like.

You are right, a full Wembley stadium isn’t just about the stadium. It’s the pressure it puts on the surrounding areas infrastructure, it would be too soon sadly for full stadiums. Most leaks so far point to households mixing indoors by July so taking that into account we can’t have full stadiums for the Euros. 

[Paul ™]

48 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

I’m just listening to him .. he’s just said they have fallen partly due to the new quarunteen measures .... I mean yes I’m sure this will stop some cases ... but how on earth is he able to say this .. given we have only had this for less than a week 

He's full of bullshit. The measures have been in for 6 days, there is no evidence at all that cases have fallen due to the new quarantine measures.

But this will be paving the way for them to scrap it at the end of March when it's due for review, and going back to self-isolating at home for 10 days with the new 2 test package to back that up for all inbound passengers.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Paul ™

[sisco]

4 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

We don't know that yet. We really don't. In terms of the vaccination programme being "complete", that means two doses to every adult. Over time it may emerge that you cut transmission that much more after the second dose. Or it might not, we'll have to follow the data as it emerges. But like Glastonbury, there's probably enough uncertainty to not plan in any extreme events like full stadia as early as June.

But we also don’t know when a booster is needed and by the time everyone has their vaccines that might be needed, so do we roll on again and say can’t open X, Y and Z until boosters are done?

Its really confusing! Literally don’t know what the right answer is

[BobWillis]

8 minutes ago, xxialac said:

A beach cannot even begin to be compared to a 90,000 full Wembley stadium.

A full Wembley is rammed tube train after tube train, a walk up to the stadium where you're elbow to elbow and a huddle at *indoor* bars getting drinks at half time, heaving pubs and a lot of drunk people who lose their inhibitions.

I can only think you've forgotten what a packed mass event is like.

I like how you ignored the protests because you know full well people were elbow to elbow walking up and down the streets of London and nothing came of it. 
You’re also talking like we’re filling Wembley last summer, not this summer with most of the population vaccinated at least once and potentially mass rapid testing in place. 

[xxialac]

2 minutes ago, Paul ™ said:

He's full of bullshit. The measures have been in for 6 days, there is no evidence at all that cases have fallen due to the new quarantine measures.

But this will be paving the way for them to scrap it at the end of March when it's due for review, and going back to self-isolating at home for 10 days with the new 2 test package to back that up for all inbound passengers.

Nail on the head!

[Guest]

Was Matt Hancock challenged at all by Marr about how he acted unlawfully over COVID procurement? 

[xxialac]

Just now, BobWillis said:

I like how you ignored the protests because you know full well people were elbow to elbow walking up and down the streets of London and nothing came of it. 
You’re also talking like we’re filling Wembley last summer, not this summer with most of the population vaccinated at least once and potentially mass rapid testing in place. 

Which London protests are you referring to?

[xxialac]

Just now, Ozanne said:

Was Matt Hancock challenged at all by Marr about how he acted unlawfully over COVID procurement? 

Yes, very strongly by Marr for once.

And he dismissed the conclusions that he acted unlawfully as of no importance.

This government again thinks it is above the law - these are dangerous people.

[Hannibal Schmitt]

28 minutes ago, Jack.194 said:

Yea I agree, it was a pain to set up but it’s a well oiled and working system now that it is set up.

That being said I work in a SEN school so pupils aren’t getting tested, just staff I imagine in a mainstream school it’s a lot harder.

We have had a lot more cases than I originally thought we would have though.

A few days ago it was published 1,3 Mio. pupils, teachers and school staff were tested here and 536 were found positive. 

[stuartbert two hats]

12 minutes ago, sisco said:

But we also don’t know when a booster is needed and by the time everyone has their vaccines that might be needed, so do we roll on again and say can’t open X, Y and Z until boosters are done?

Its really confusing! Literally don’t know what the right answer is

We just have to follow the data. I suspect we'll actually be fine for a good while once everyone is vaccinated. 

If I had to bet, we'll be fully open by September, but start administering all the second gen vaccines as boosters and to deal with the new variants in late autumn/early winter this year.

And then we'll probably be done for a while. We'll see.

[BobWillis]

9 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Which London protests are you referring to?

Oh you’re going for the deliberately obtuse angle, cool. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Yes, very strongly by Marr for once.

And he dismissed the conclusions that he acted unlawfully as of no importance.

This government again thinks it is above the law - these are dangerous people.

I’m surprised Marr went strongly on it, not surprised about the response though. One rule for one remember!

The upvote was for responding not the outcome by the way 😂

[steviewevie]

Rawnsley on Boris and his roadmap.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/21/boris-johnson-roadmap-atypically-slow-steady

[Copperface]

14 minutes ago, Paul ™ said:

He's full of bullshit. The measures have been in for 6 days, there is no evidence at all that cases have fallen due to the new quarantine measures.

But this will be paving the way for them to scrap it at the end of March when it's due for review, and going back to self-isolating at home for 10 days with the new 2 test package to back that up for all inbound passengers.

Not being funny and just to avoid confusion, the managed isolation measures are not up for review in March and are not anything to do with the Coronavirus Act (which does have a review in March but will undoubtedly be passed).

They are a Statutory Instrument Reg and can be switched on or off at any time, but unrelated to the Act which is due to expire in 2022.

[charlierc]

21 minutes ago, xxialac said:

A beach cannot even begin to be compared to a 90,000 full Wembley stadium.

A full Wembley is rammed tube train after tube train, a walk up to the stadium where you're elbow to elbow and a huddle at *indoor* bars getting drinks at half time, heaving pubs and a lot of drunk people who lose their inhibitions.

I can only think you've forgotten what a packed mass event is like.

Certainly, I think there was a note that, in the first few weeks after it, the areas around Cheltenham had a higher case rate than other areas in South West England due to the horse racing festival held on that weekend when everything else was grinding to a stop. Plus there's all the talk about what the effects were of the Liverpool v Atletico Madrid Champions League tie in the same week. It is of course stuff like getting there and pubs/restaurants as much as the venue itself.

These things will be back eventually, but whether its the right conditions for it to come back this summer or we just run out of time beforehand is another question.

[xxialac]

 

Just now, BobWillis said:

Oh you’re going for the deliberately obtuse angle, cool. 

No. We're trying to debate a topic and I don't want to make any assumptions about what you're referring to. Can't see how that would be a problem.