Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

Just now, squirrelarmy said:

Basically they are going to blame the third wave in Europe for any rise in cases here even if the rise here is due to the restrictions ending. Covering their arses and will be used as a soundbite if they have to go back on the agreed dates for lifting further restrictions. 

Yep, it's total bollocks what he's saying and illogical to boot.

Cases have risen in Europe as a) their restrictions have been easing (not in lockdown) and moreso b) the virus first identified in UK has been taking hold.

Any future rise in UK had got next to nothing to do with it spreading from elsewhere now that we are barely seeing any travel and that there is is subject to strict controls.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

It’s looking increasingly likely we won’t be getting the loosening on the 17th May (the fun stuff). Maybe by the beginning of June?

No, it's not. By any of the 4 tests the government have set, we're matching or ahead of the best case scenario that they laid out in February and there's no signs that's likely to change.

I'm still very confident that not only will we hit the May date, but that some of the items currently scheduled for June 21st will be brought forward.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

Sowing the seeds for anything after local elections being pushed back?

It’s looking increasingly likely we won’t be getting the loosening on the 17th May (the fun stuff). Maybe by the beginning of June?

Unlikely. I think he's just getting an excuse ready just in case but I think as long as we keep pace with our vaccinations so we get all risk groups 1-9 completed by Mid May then we will see restrictions be lifted by 21st June. You only have to look at Israel who have vaccinated 60% of the population with at least one jab. The economy is fully open and deaths/ critical ill and cases have dropped by 75%-86% since January peak. 

The R rate 40 days after lockdown exit is 0.62 and continues to drop.  Those are stunning numbers. 

 

Always said by the summer deaths and hospitalisations will be in single figures 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Basically they are going to blame the third wave in Europe for any rise in cases here even if the rise here is due to the restrictions ending. Covering their arses and will be used as a soundbite if they have to go back on the agreed dates for lifting further restrictions. 

Wonder when the Tory death group will start kicking off loudly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Yep, it's total bollocks what he's saying and illogical to boot.

Cases have risen in Europe as a) their restrictions have been easing (not in lockdown) and moreso b) the virus first identified in UK has been taking hold.

Any future rise in UK had got next to nothing to do with it spreading from elsewhere now that we are barely seeing any travel and that there is is subject to strict controls.

 

by "the virus first identified in UK"you mean UK VARIANT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesnt sound like hes going to go behind the roadmap

 

  • He said the UK would “bash on” with the roadmap to easing restrictions. He said:

"Clearly the matters to us in the UK is that we get on with the rollout of the vaccine programme. I think we’ve now done over half the adults in the country, which is very good news.

And we’re on course to do ... groups 1 to 9, all the over 50s, by April, 15, and we will just bash on with the roadmap that we’ve set out, and the programme that we’ve got."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Yep, it's total bollocks what he's saying and illogical to boot.

Cases have risen in Europe as a) their restrictions have been easing (not in lockdown) and moreso b) the virus first identified in UK has been taking hold.

Any future rise in UK had got next to nothing to do with it spreading from elsewhere now that we are barely seeing any travel and that there is is subject to strict controls.

 

It’s the equivalent of telling your boss that you’re feeling a little bit ropey before you go out for a heavy midweek session. Your hangover sickie can then be blamed on you being “ill” if you don’t make it to work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Yep, it's total bollocks what he's saying and illogical to boot.

Cases have risen in Europe as a) their restrictions have been easing (not in lockdown) and moreso b) the virus first identified in UK has been taking hold.

Any future rise in UK had got next to nothing to do with it spreading from elsewhere now that we are barely seeing any travel and that there is is subject to strict controls.

 

 

51 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

I fail to understand how (excusing a rise in cases due to our own unlocking) we will have a third wave which is due to cases elsewhere in Europe?

Perhaps someone can explain?

Hang on, if this is the SA variant that's going to be dominating the third wave - the variant where the AZ vaccine does nothing to stop infection (even if it prevents serious disease), then that's going to have an impact, surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, jparx said:

When people say what are you most looking forward to post-Covid, the answer rapidly rising up my list is not having to deal with this mindfuck news cycle anymore. Ive kept a relatively even keel this past year, but I’ve gone from reading about Latitude happening in July to social distancing remaining for years in the space of 24 hours.

I don't mean this in a confrontational way, but what do you think social distancing is?

When I read stuff like it continuing for years, I read that as us having to be somewhat conscious of distance in social settings for a long time to come. That doesn't mean not being able to see friends, not being able to go to the pub, etc. But it might mean trying to avoid crowds, not shaking hands with absolutely everyone at a business meeting, that sort of thing.

It's about having an awareness of distance because something nasty is still circulating, albeit at a low level. It's about avoiding unnecessary contact. Just with the caveat that having fun is still "necessary".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, theevilfridge said:

Absolute die-hard remainer here (I went on the marches and everything), and while this is obviously true in terms of the rules, politically it simply wouldn’t have happened if we were still in the EU. There’s no way one member would be able to get so extravagantly ahead of everyone else in the bloc without being made to share their supply.

It’s still not a strong argument for Brexit (particularly as it looks like the EU might be able to equalise supply across the continent by banning exports to the UK anyway) but I do think claiming it hasn’t been a factor at all is naive.

I don't think for a second that if we were still in the EU, there would only be 4 factories in the EU making the vaccine. The MHRA would have essentially been advising the entirety of the EU, as it was known to be the best at this sort of thing. We would have had the pull in the EU to make things better for everyone. We'd probably be talking about twelve factories now rather than four.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DeanoL said:

I don't mean this in a confrontational way, but what do you think social distancing is?

When I read stuff like it continuing for years, I read that as us having to be somewhat conscious of distance in social settings for a long time to come. That doesn't mean not being able to see friends, not being able to go to the pub, etc. But it might mean trying to avoid crowds, not shaking hands with absolutely everyone at a business meeting, that sort of thing.

It's about having an awareness of distance because something nasty is still circulating, albeit at a low level. It's about avoiding unnecessary contact. Just with the caveat that having fun is still "necessary".

Surely that by extension takes big crowds off the table though? It wouldn't bother many of us on here but logically how do you sell being careful to the public while allowing crowds to gather in (perceived) unsanitary conditions?

If caution is required, crowds fall on the wrong side of the line 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Surely that by extension takes big crowds off the table though? It wouldn't bother many of us on here but logically how do you sell being careful to the public while allowing crowds to gather in (perceived) unsanitary conditions?

If caution is required, crowds fall on the wrong side of the line 

You go ahead and have those close contacts because they're the only way you can have events like that. So they are "necessary". What's not necessary is shaking hands 99% of the time. 

That's what continued social distancing will mean: being aware that contacts that put you at risk, and not taking risks that add zero value to your life. Pay with a contactless card where you can instead of handling cash. Don't walk close to someone when there's space on the pavement to pass them with a bigger gap. 

Short term I think there may be an issue with large indoor standing gigs - I think festivals will be deemed safe enough as it's outdoors, and nightclubs don't work any other way, but I could see a push from certain areas to make all larger indoor gigs seated with the argument that the extra contacts you get from a standing gig are unnecessary.

But mostly it'll be about just being conscious of not being closer to people than you need to be. Once you start thinking about how we used to live and how little thought we even gave it, you realise how big a change it'll be just to conscious of that sort of thing at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, George_92 said:

 

 

The removing the stay at home rule makes the regs a hell of a lot more complex.

 

For example there’s no explicit ban of going on holiday atm, you’re just not allowed to leave your house without a valid excuse (and going on holiday isn’t a valid excuse)

 

Now that the stay at home rule is gone, the government has to explicitly ban a lot more things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, squirrelarmy said:

Basically they are going to blame the third wave in Europe for any rise in cases here even if the rise here is due to the restrictions ending. Covering their arses and will be used as a soundbite if they have to go back on the agreed dates for lifting further restrictions. 

Surely any wave is irrelevant if the vaccine actually works. If it works then the hospitalisations and serious illness will be next to nothing. Coupled with the apparent ability to break infection (think i read reduces approx 60+%). 

I think it all depends on how the government react to increased positive tests. Which for me is not the same thing as a case. If nobody is getting sick then everything should go ahead as planned. Lockdowns were only ever to protect the NHS....... apparently. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Havors said:

Surely any wave is irrelevant if the vaccine actually works. If it works then the hospitalisations and serious illness will be next to nothing. Coupled with the apparent ability to break infection (think i read reduces approx 60+%). 

I think it all depends on how the government react to increased positive tests. Which for me is not the same thing as a case. If nobody is getting sick then everything should go ahead as planned. Lockdowns were only ever to protect the NHS....... apparently. 

Yeah agreed. A study came out in the US where the AZ vaccine was found to prevent 79% of symptoms and 100% of serious illness + hospitalisation. Thats real world. 

I don't see us having a 3rd wave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

The removing the stay at home rule makes the regs a hell of a lot more complex.

 

For example there’s no explicit ban of going on holiday atm, you’re just not allowed to leave your house without a valid excuse (and going on holiday isn’t a valid excuse)

 

Now that the stay at home rule is gone, the government has to explicitly ban a lot more things. 

I was wondering about this. Living in London zone 3, when the April date comes, I was wondering if we would be 'allowed' to get on a train and go to a nice restaurant in town, as opposed to going to a local pub garden (which is what we have booked). Does anyone know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Homer said:

I was wondering about this. Living in London zone 3, when the April date comes, I was wondering if we would be 'allowed' to get on a train and go to a nice restaurant in town, as opposed to going to a local pub garden (which is what we have booked). Does anyone know?

Yes you would.

 

The stay at home rule ends a week from today. Technically you could board a train for 3 hours to go and sit in someone’s garden in Newcastle. 
 

You might not want to because it would be a pain in the arse to trek up there if it were to start raining and technically you wouldn’t even be able to go in for a wee or stay overnight, but once the stay at home rule ends there is nothing stopping you travelling anywhere in England 

Edited by Fuzzy Afro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Boris says we need to corporate.  I can feel a deal bring struck.  Face saving time in operation

If previous deals between the EU and Britain are anything to go by it's going to take about 5 years to reach an agreement...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...