When will this shit end?

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

Your gonna be gutted bae 😛

I know for a fact the governments 'unlocking' is measured. 

Lets all come back here and catch up again tomorrow night.

 

It does look increasingly likely that the government will go for a cautious approach to loosening the restrictions which is needed. We’ll get everything back that we want, it’ll just take a bit more time. 

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, st dan said:

Any comparisons to releasing from previous lockdowns are completely futile, as we now have 17m of the most vulnerable vaccinated - which we now also know are going to be very, very effective. 

If we didn’t have these vaccines then of course there would be an argument that we need to be more cautious than last time, but also worth noting that the first two months after opening up (July to Sep) both cases and deaths were extremely low. 

We also have more people in hospital now as we’ve got better at treatment so a smaller proportion of people are dying. 70+ people were generally not even put into ICU because it’s too much strain on their bodies- so a lot of stuff like ICU and ventilator capacity has only ever been relevant for younger people.

1 hour ago, aj6658 said:

Thing is the number of people who have died because of COVID <50 is like 500. Its tiny. 

Because hospital treatment for them is really effective. And the treatment regimes were different to what over 70s were getting. We need to ensure that space is still available or the death rate will go up hugely.

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Variations are overstated. Cant stay locked down 'just in case '. 

You need a mitigation in place. The mitigation is normally “we can treat the people who get it relatively well”. But that’s only true if NHS admissions come down. If we free up NHS capacity to deal with new unforeseen stuff, we don’t need to lockdown for it. But we need to do one or the other.

[MrBarry465]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It does look increasingly likely that the government will go for a cautious approach to loosening the restrictions which is needed. We’ll get everything back that we want, it’ll just take a bit more time. 

Yep, lets get the job done.

Lets just do it properly and then its done. 

Edited February 21, 2021 by MrBarry465

[xxialac]

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Variations are overstated. Cant stay locked down 'just in case '. 

I dont see why we should have restrictions because of idiots not taking the vaccine 

Those are 2 reasons. And what about the other 4 reasons I gave for having to do this gradually, rather than at warp speed?

Plus some of those 'idiots' will end up in hospital and use up valuable NHS resources so protecting them also protects us.

Finally we are 'locked down' now. As restrictions ease, we will very soon no longer be locked down - and indeed you will be able to do most things as normal by the Summer...just not everything.

[steviewevie]

8 minutes ago, Copperface said:

What are they actually going to do except bitch on about what they think should happen about it in the media?

They also might not want to create too many waves in the runup to the local elections.

 

they will just continue to make life difficult for Johnson, like ERG did for May. It's all the rage for tory backbenchers to vote against the government these days.

So, if Johnson's roadmap is more data than dates, then maybe CRG can be convinced to vote for it in the hope that with better data they can get pubs open by Easter or thereabouts, which seems to be what they are really after.

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Those are 2 reasons. And what about the other 4 reasons I gave for having to do this gradually, rather than at warp speed?

Plus some of those 'idiots' will end up in hospital and use up valuable NHS resources so protecting them also protects us.

Finally we are 'locked down' now. As restrictions ease, we will very soon no longer be locked down - and indeed you will be able to do most things as normal by the Summer...just not everything.

I dont mind 3 week gaps. But I do mind keeping restrictions in when the deaths/hospitalisations are very low. 

But if they are going to make mask wearing and social distancing 'guidance' rather than law, then fine.

[Copperface]

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

they will just continue to make life difficult for Johnson, like ERG did for May. It's all the rage for tory backbenchers to vote against the government these days.

So, if Johnson's roadmap is more data than dates, then maybe CRG can be convinced to vote for it in the hope that with better data they can get pubs open by Easter or thereabouts, which seems to be what they are really after.

There is no vote on the roadmap as far as I know, unless someone knows different.

[StuMalinas]

13 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

Yep, lets get the job done.

Lets just do it properly and then its done. 

I am totally for restrictions being in place till the end of april if it means the data gets so low and we can open up properly in May

[Crazyfool01]

21 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Variations are overstated. Cant stay locked down 'just in case '. 

I dont see why we should have restrictions because of idiots not taking the vaccine 

It’s not just idiots not taking the vaccine ... it’s some highly vulnerable and some of the most at risk in BAme community’s that have been targeted by misinformation... hopefully those people will be be convinced by the time restrictions are lifted ... whenever it might be ... these will get protected by herd immunity won’t they ? So that’s an important stage to get to ? 

[MrBarry465]

Just now, StuMalinas said:

I am totally for restrictions being in place till the end of april if it means the data gets so low and we can open up properly in May

In many ways I aggree, we should just eliminate the fucker. 

[StuMalinas]

Just now, crazyfool1 said:

It’s not just idiots not taking the vaccine ... it’s some highly vulnerable and some of the most at risk in BAme community’s that have been targeted by misinformation... hopefully those people will be be convinced by the time restrictions are lifted ... whenever it might be ... these will get protected by herd immunity won’t they ? So that’s an important stage to get to ? 

I actually think the vaccine should be a legal requirement to take it or if not vaccine passports being a shoe in to all the big events and that means those daft enough not to take it will miss out

[Simsy]

46 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

How many of those 465 had underlying health conditions such that they’d have been vaccinated by now?

Problem with the stats on "underlying health conditions" for people who've died is it's a ridiculously broad definition. People have been counted as having an underlying condition even if it's something like depression or a broken bone. The people dying with underlying conditions aren't just those who were clinically vulnerable and who would've been at the front of the jab queue.

[StuMalinas]

Just now, MrBarry465 said:

In many ways I aggree, we should just eliminate the fucker. 

Just surely a zero covid approach will mean cases will be so low that there will hardly be any coronavirus circulating which means that with the higher vaccination of the population means coronavirus struggles to survive here

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, StuMalinas said:

I actually think the vaccine should be a legal requirement to take it or if not vaccine passports being a shoe in to all the big events and that means those daft enough not to take it will miss out

There are some that medically are unable to take it aren’t there ? So some provision needs to be made for those ? And those sold misinformation... it’s not so simple 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Copperface said:

There is no vote on the roadmap as far as I know, unless someone knows different.

I’m pretty sure they’ll be a vote on the roadmap in the middle of the week. 

[StuMalinas]

Just now, crazyfool1 said:

There are some that medically are unable to take it aren’t there ? So some provision needs to be made for those ? And those sold misinformation... it’s not so simple 

Appreciate those who can't take it medically but the more people who can take it means the risk to those who can't is significantly lower.

[st dan]

3 minutes ago, StuMalinas said:

I am totally for restrictions being in place till the end of april if it means the data gets so low and we can open up properly in May

I think everybody would accept this wouldn’t they? I don’t get why it isn’t an roadmap they are putting forward.  
It would allow all 50+ to have their vaccines (and for at least 3 weeks for it to kick it), and the most vulnerable should have had both their jabs by too as well.
Yes it’s another two months, but people would be ok with that I think, if they knew where we stand and that the majority of restrictions will be gone when things do open up. 

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

There are some that medically are unable to take it aren’t there ? So some provision needs to be made for those ? And those sold misinformation... it’s not so simple 

Medical reasons is fine but that's not a massive amount.

I dont see why I should suffer over some idiot believing a you tube video from David icke

[Copperface]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

I’m pretty sure they’ll be a vote on the roadmap in the middle of the week. 

No idea. haven't seen anything published referring to that. There might be, but not seen it. Even if the CRG did rebel, like in December, their vote is almost inconsequential.

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, StuMalinas said:

Appreciate those who can't take it medically but the more people who can take it means the risk to those who can't is significantly lower.

So how would vaccine passports work for those ? I’m playing devils advocate here a little ... yes I absolutely agree that most need to be vaccinated and there needs to be as many ways as possible to get this to happen ... but does it need to be that those people can’t do anything because they can’t have a passport 

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

Medical reasons is fine but that's not a massive amount.

I dont see why I should suffer over some idiot believing a you tube video from David icke

What about those sold misinformation ? Not necessarily idiots ... just chosen to believe something different based on an effective sales technique 

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Copperface said:

No idea. haven't seen anything published referring to that. There might be, but not seen it. Even if the CRG did rebel, like in December, their vote is almost inconsequential.

yeah, government won't lose because of labour votes....but those CRG MPs could get a taste for rebellion against Johnson...and many more difficult decisions to come that they might not like.

[StuMalinas]

4 minutes ago, st dan said:

I think everybody would accept this wouldn’t they? I don’t get why it isn’t an roadmap they are putting forward.  
It would allow all 50+ to have their vaccines (and for at least 3 weeks for it to kick it), and the most vulnerable should have had both their jabs by too as well.
Yes it’s another two months, but people would be ok with that I think, if they knew where we stand and that the majority of restrictions will be gone when things do open up. 

I think this is what they are sorta doing, They aren't relaxing many restrictions in the next couple of months so I when the Data allows they will open up rapidly. 2 more months is nothing really in the grand scheme of things. I appreciate mental health is a big factor which is why I think people should be able to meet socially outside starting from now within groups of six but no indoor until May 

[zahidf]

Just now, steviewevie said:

yeah, government won't lose because of labour votes....but those CRG MPs could get a taste for rebellion against Johnson...and many more difficult decisions to come that they might not like.

In party management terms, BJ can't only win votes because of Labour helping him out.

[steviewevie]

Just now, zahidf said:

In party management terms, BJ can't only win votes because of Labour helping him out.

if he can't get what he requires from his own backbenchers...CRG may be won over.