When will this shit end?

[Mellotr0n]

Hancock saying they're hoping to allow us to OFFICIALLY hug friends and family on May 17th.

Don't you be going out May 16th evening for an illegal back alley 2am hugging session.

[JoeyT]

7 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Hancock saying they're hoping to allow us to OFFICIALLY hug friends and family on May 17th.

Don't you be going out May 16th evening for an illegal back alley 2am hugging session.

You try and stop me!

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by JoeyT

[zahidf]

The UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, has said that everyone needs to play their part in order to meet the targets set for easing lockdown in England with the aim to move to “personal responsibility” rather than having social distancing laws “that get in the way of normal life”.

Hancock said that while England’s chief scientific adviser, Patrick Vallance, made it clear that people might still need to wear a mask this winter, the government wanted to “get rid of social distancing-type laws” that “dictate how all of us live our daily lives.”

[zahidf]

6 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Hancock saying they're hoping to allow us to OFFICIALLY hug friends and family on May 17th.

Don't you be going out May 16th evening for an illegal back alley 2am hugging session.

Looolll. I'll be doing more than hugging people from March. Back to bumble!

[Mellotr0n]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

The UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, has said that everyone needs to play their part in order to meet the targets set for easing lockdown in England with the aim to move to “personal responsibility” rather than having social distancing laws “that get in the way of normal life”.

Hancock said that while England’s chief scientific adviser, Patrick Vallance, made it clear that people might still need to wear a mask this winter, the government wanted to “get rid of social distancing-type laws” that “dictate how all of us live our daily lives.”

Exactly. Winter restrictions most likely = guidance on masks in shops/public transport. Not lockdowns.

Edited February 23, 2021 by Mellotr0n

[JoeyT]

 

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, JoeyT said:

 

Detailed??? 

The 4 tests could not be more vague. No numbers provided on what success looks like.

• The vaccine deployment programme continues successfully
• Evidence shows vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths in those vaccinated
• Infection rates do not risk a surge in hospitalisations which would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS
• The assessment of the risks is not fundamentally changed by new variants of concern.

[incident]

27 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

4 weeks to gather the data and one week to examine it is perfectly reasonable, not everyone is going to immediately start going to pubs/restaurants etc as soon as they are opened, you need time to fully assess the impact.

According to Hancock, they're going to confirm the actual changes a week before they take effect - so in practice the important parts of evaluation and assessment will have to be done during the initial 4 weeks and the 5th week becomes just a token waiting period.

So if they stuck rigidly to the 5 week gap and for all restrictions (which they won't for this reason), then there could and likely would be a situation where they've officially determined an activity is safe and yet are telling people that they can't do it for another week.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Detailed??? 

The 4 tests could not be more vague. No numbers provided on what success looks like.

• The vaccine deployment programme continues successfully
• Evidence shows vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths in those vaccinated
• Infection rates do not risk a surge in hospitalisations which would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS
• The assessment of the risks is not fundamentally changed by new variants of concern.

They have the targets for vaccine set out in broad terms. So they can see if that's on track based on supply for 1.

2. They are tracking the vaccine effectiveness. If it reduces hospitalisations...

 

3. Is vague I agree but that's because they want to downgrade cases.

4. Thats just saying things may change if thee is a bad new variant. What so you want quantified?

[st dan]

4 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Detailed??? 

The 4 tests could not be more vague. No numbers provided on what success looks like.

• The vaccine deployment programme continues successfully
• Evidence shows vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths in those vaccinated
• Infection rates do not risk a surge in hospitalisations which would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS
• The assessment of the risks is not fundamentally changed by new variants of concern.

They will have internal goals and targets for each of these criteria - they don’t need to share these with the public at all.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, incident said:

According to Hancock, they're going to confirm the actual changes a week before they take effect - so in practice the important parts of evaluation and assessment will have to be done during the initial 4 weeks and the 5th week becomes just a token waiting period.

So if they stuck rigidly to the 5 week gap and for all restrictions (which they won't for this reason), then there could and likely would be a situation where they've officially determined an activity is safe and yet are telling people that they can't do it for another week.

The extra week is to give people and businesses time to plan. So they have the 4 weeks data collection and review then if all good that extra weeks is to let people know and give them the time to prepare. 

[incident]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

The extra week is to give people and businesses time to plan. So they have the 4 weeks data collection and review then if all good that extra weeks is to let people know and give them the time to prepare. 

So you agree that for non business related aspects, it's functionally pointless?

[zahidf]

Just now, incident said:

So you agree that for non business related aspects, it's functionally pointless?

I imagine people will be hugging as soon as confirmation is given. They wont wait a week for no reason

[JoeyT]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

The extra week is to give people and businesses time to plan. So they have the 4 weeks data collection and review then if all good that extra weeks is to let people know and give them the time to prepare. 

Makes sense for businesses that require notice to open but some simply don't?

Also, being told the data says it is safe to hug granny for instance what is the sense in waiting an additional week?!

[incident]

Just now, zahidf said:

I imagine people will be hugging as soon as confirmation is given. They wont wait a week for no reason

Yes exactly.

And the Government will take great pleasure in "generously" telling them that they don't need to wait that extra week after all.

Can spot this coming a mile off.

[Mellotr0n]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

I imagine people will be hugging as soon as confirmation is given. They wont wait a week for no reason

I'll be using that week to shower and make sure my arms are fully stretched out.

[st dan]

Hancock trying to be the government’s chief enforcer / bad cop is laughable. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, incident said:

So you agree that for non business related aspects, it's functionally pointless?

I was just saying the reason they had used for the 5 weeks. I presume they are using that period for all businesses and people as it’s easier than giving some an option 1 week and 1 the other. They want us all moving into these different steps together. 

[steviewevie]

What is the science behind plans to relax England's lockdown?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/22/covid-what-is-the-science-behind-plans-to-relax-englands-lockdown

[steviewevie]

Inst of govt: The government’s Covid lockdown roadmap points to an uncertain journey

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/covid-lockdown-roadmap

[Simsy]

Is it just me who's thinking if there was a general election in May they'd announce that we've all done so well pubs can reopen a couple of weeks earlier than planned? Don't know if they'd bother doing this just for local elections.

[zahidf]

22 minutes ago, incident said:

Yes exactly.

And the Government will take great pleasure in "generously" telling them that they don't need to wait that extra week after all.

Can spot this coming a mile off.

TBH i think they can probably reinstitue rule of 6 outside tomorrow without any changes to the R Rate. Waiting a month seems pointless to me

[squirrelarmy]

26 minutes ago, incident said:

Yes exactly.

And the Government will take great pleasure in "generously" telling them that they don't need to wait that extra week after all.

Can spot this coming a mile off.

Feel sorry for any food and beverage places frantically trying to bring forward their deliveries and call in their staff a week earlier. 
 

Beer can’t brew any faster and staff may already have other plans. 

[incident]

2 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Feel sorry for any food and beverage places frantically trying to bring forward their deliveries and call in their staff a week earlier. 
 

Beer can’t brew any faster and staff may already have other plans. 

We're literally talking about the non-business related restrictions though.

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 hours ago, xxialac said:

What on earth was wrong with those excellent predictions??

An underestimate if anything...

Sweden and the USA provide the control group you’re looking for. It’s pie in the sky nonsense to think that the lockdown prevented 130,000+ more deaths