When will this shit end?

[stuie]

2 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Is it ironic if someone who has wound their neck in considerably in recent times tells someone else to do the same?

I don’t spend enough time on here to keep up with every user, just going by the rep.

2 minutes ago, gooner1990 said:

I'm in the former camp.

Anymore lockdowns and my mental health will slide even further south than it has done already.

Exactly. But apparently I should be ashamed of myself! 

[steviewevie]

6 minutes ago, stuie said:

It’s divided now between those who wants their lives back (who are apparently selfish bastards) and those who think we should stay home for another year, just in case. 

or centrists like me.

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

If opening everything too early causes a surge in cases then the lockdown will have been a waste of time. Another few weeks of being cautious if needed isn’t going to be that life changing. Indoor activities are starting next week so those people who are needing social activity can start to get it. 

They wouldn’t be if fake SAGE had their way 

[efcfanwirral]

 

22 minutes ago, thewayiam said:

That's not what he's saying. He's saying the government shouldn't have included the June 21 date at all and that it should have been noted for May 17th and anything further would be mentioned further on etc etc.

No he hasn't put this but I've read between the lines. There is no need to come across to people a bit like it's slander.

I have always been all for everyone being vaccined that could be before things go back to normal and imo if vaccines are now okay for under 18s or safe and they delay that process as they now have evidence of safety for it then so be it. 

That is indeed what I meant! And any further easing would've been a nice surprise, a bonus. 

12 minutes ago, ErnestWorthing said:

But the unvaccinated are the young, and they're already unlikely to be hospitalised

Absolute numbers of younger people in one area catching a (potentially) 60% higher transmissible virus takes the small % who need hospital treatment and turns it into a higher absolute number. Move them to another hospital? Yes but eventually they'll be in the same situation. 

 That then causes overload of the hospital and stops potentially heart attacks etc being treated, kicks off another load of in hospital transmission for people who go in with other things etc 

A scenario we may well be sleepwalking into, but we don't know yet. This doesn't even involve June 21st this'll happen before that date if its going to

I've been very much up for opening up quickly and if it wasn't for the potential of this variant causing these problems I still would be as it was all looking fine - it's just this new development which has made me take a step back and look at it.

If we extend by a few weeks to get more data, it could stop us having to have another set of restrictions for a few months and then it's winter, so really until next spring.

Had we not let this variant in, we'd be able to open up here. The announcement of the green list before any review of social distancing and rules here shows their priorities.

Edited May 13, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[squirrelarmy]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

or centrists like me.

Dirty centrist. Pick a side. 

[fraybentos1]

I think Neil said a while back this thread was going as of next month. Can't come soon enough!

Ps any talk of a variant which completely evades these vaccines is total fiction. Don't need to be a scientist to say that.

[steviewevie]

Just now, squirrelarmy said:

Dirty centrist. Pick a side. 

I want it to end asap, but sick of way people go on about scientists on here so feel the need to defend them.

[Havors]

18 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

No. But that's a large "if" - we don't know if the vaccine works that way on new variants. We have indications it does to some extent, but don't have the data to know exactly how much. 

It'll probably be fine. It's a question of if the government are willing to gamble on that "if" or not.

I think its kind of the other way around... there are no indications that the variants will make any significant difference to the vaccinated population. If we keep things locked down wating for the "if" a certain variant miraculously becomes a new virus and makes current immunity worthless we will never ever come out of the restrictions. 

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.27.433180v1

[thewayiam]

9 minutes ago, Havors said:

In your opinion. Everyone who was vulnerable has already been vaccinated at least 1 does, large amount 2 doses now. There is little to no reason for under 18's to need a vaccination for something that is practically harmless to them. 

Like I have said, the vaccine apparently works. Incredibly well. So not opening back up come June 21st will be completely illogical.

Yes it's my opinion. But I'm allowed one, you are allowed one.

I'n aware of the age of harmless and harmful etc. I've been down to 18 anyway. People have got this virus at young ages and I don't believe the whole, if they get it then two weeks inside just dealing with it, is okay. 

But if they open up full upon reach all 18s then I'm okay with that.

But an I going to knock anyone in a high professional capacity than me for saying different to that?, no I'm not.

6 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

You call someone else selfish while being selfish yourself...

Its okay for you to say we should wait before releasing restrictions on pubs...  its not your livelihood and finances at stake I would imagine.

Why is what I've said selfish? 

May 17th pubs are allowed to be open so what are you actually trying to say? Pubs are bloody open now.

 

[efcfanwirral]

13 minutes ago, stuie said:

It’s divided now between those who wants their lives back (who are apparently selfish bastards) and those who think we should stay home for another year, 

I'm actually saying the best way to avoid longer term restrictions could be to hold off a bit until we know more. 

[Havors]

8 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

If opening everything too early causes a surge in cases then the lockdown will have been a waste of time. Another few weeks of being cautious if needed isn’t going to be that life changing. Indoor activities are starting next week so those people who are needing social activity can start to get it. 

Nobody has said any different. That is why there is 5 weeks between stages to assess the effects. So, if 4 weeks after May 17th there is no significantly increased issues over what is expected then the 21st will happen. 

Im optimistic myself, as I believe the vaccine works and the evidence all points to it working. Any extension of the June 21st date I feel will come from social & media pressure on the government and not actual scientific evidence. 

[thewayiam]

4 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I mean with a rep of -2090 this is a seriously funny comment 😄 

Why?, most of them are from times gone by. And most of them came from just anything I said.....literally.

To mention someone else's comments and twist them into something that wasn't said or just make something up from what wasn't said is pathetic and just pointless.

It's pure greed over.....I want to see my band and I want it now.

I will not stand for from whoever it may be people having lost lives to due a real life situation and then comments on it ignoring any of that and trying to defend what is clear as seen on this board.

Some of these threads have made efestivals on the last year a joke! Some people hardly ever enter the Glastonbury thread due to it....what does that tell you.

 

[zahidf]

11 minutes ago, Havors said:

Hence we have been locked down now for over 5 months... this is and has been very cautious. Sensibly so in my opinion... but all restrictions lifting on June 21st needs to happen (or close to it) or its all been a waste of time. 

Exactly. the initial road map was way too overly cautious for my taste, but i was willing to go along with it as a compromise. Any deviation based on this flimsy at the moment variant premise or 'to get everyone vaccinated' would be unacceptable. 

[Havors]

14 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

well, yeah, hopefully...we'll see... I wouldn't be surprised if some restrictions are kept in place until everyone has been fully vaccinated.

Yeah, I would not be very surprised if they asked to keep wearing masks in certain situations like on the tube etc. But they will be decisions made from a "it cant do any harm" point of view rather than a they are needed and demanded by science. 

[zahidf]

4 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I'm actually saying the best way to avoid longer term restrictions could be to hold off a bit until we know more. 

How long for? Indefinitely?

Id rather the Govt put in local restrictions if some areas have issues rather than just punish the entire country

[st dan]

Good to see Johnson and co have held firm and not bent the rules for the Champions League final. I believe UEFA were pushing for Wembley and waive quarantine rules for fans, players, sponsors etc but were met with a firm no. Hence the move to Portugal. 
I was expecting them to roll over on this, but good to see they seem to be taking things seriously even at this stage. 

Edited May 13, 2021 by st dan

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, st dan said:

Good to see Johnson and co have held firm and not bent the rules for the Champions League final. I believe UEFA were pushing for Wembley and waive quarantine rules for fans, players, sponsors etc but were met with a firm no. Hence the move to Portugal. 
I was expecting them to roll over on this, but good to see they seem to be taking things seriously even at this stage. 

Yup. Would be nice to have it in London but not worth it at the moment

[zahidf]

Health Secretary Matt Hancock says the government “is worried about the rise of the Indian variant” and "are watching it very, very carefully”.

Speaking on a visit to a vaccination centre at the Central Mosque of Brent, north-west London, Hancock says the government is “putting in enhanced contact tracing so that people who test positive for this variant get extra support to make sure that we slow the spread as much as possible”.

When asked if regional lockdowns could happen, he says: “We rule nothing out. We’ve all seen last year what might be necessary.

"At the moment our goal is to tackle this through making sure everybody who tests positive gets that enhanced contact tracing and of course the vaccine programme is giving a high level of protection right across the board."

[efcfanwirral]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

How long for? Indefinitely?

Id rather the Govt put in local restrictions if some areas have issues rather than just punish the entire country

If we went full on wuhan I'd agree with you but we won't do that, so putting restrictions on one area just encourages them to go to others. 

Not indefinitely - just until we can answer the question of how transmissible it is. Or, really, so we can see the results of Bolton's unwitting experiment  

Edited May 13, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[DeanoL]

41 minutes ago, zahidf said:

That's definitely moving the goalposts. 

We will have the over 50s fully vaccinate by middle of June. Enough is enough. 

Sort of. But if supply of the vaccine had been what it should have been, we would have had everyone vaccinated (3 weeks after first shot) by 20 June - that date wasn't a coincidence. We won't quite hit that now. It was always "no earlier" than 20 June, that could have been as they assumed 20 June was the earliest date everyone would be vaccinated. 

35 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

No you are wrong...

I read all sort of stuff from all ends of this debate and I am fine with it all and take it all onboard.  But FAKE SAGE and Christina in particularly do go seriously over the top for some unknown reason.

To say we amplify it by daring to point it out is Tory level sleeve cover up stuff 😛 "Nothing to see here"

The only reason I have heard of Christina Pagel is from people on this thread, and the only people every sharing her stuff are doing so to rubbish her. 90% of the negative news stories posted on this thread are from people wanting to disagree with them. I'm happy to admit I'm one of the more cautious people on here, but it's never me posting stories about scientists saying we should extend lockdown is it? Why is that?

31 minutes ago, stuie said:

It’s divided now between those who wants their lives back (who are apparently selfish bastards) and those who think we should stay home for another year, just in case. 

Nah, just a few of us think until everyone is vaccinated. So we're not in the position of forcing people to take risks they don't want to (and that other people won't have had to take). If it were just a matter of personal choice, I'd agree with you - but re-opening places means people going back into work... and yeah, a 30-year old unvaccinated bartender is at greater risk than a vaccinated 40-year old drinker. 

26 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Wait until everyone is vaccinated...

So we need the trial to conclude in 2+ age bracket...  and then everyone in the country to have two doses...

So back to normal in Feb 2022 ? 

No we wait until everyone over 18 is done with a first dose + 3 weeks as that provides the majority of the protection. And puts everyone on a level playing field.

[DeanoL]

20 minutes ago, Havors said:

I think its kind of the other way around... there are no indications that the variants will make any significant difference to the vaccinated population. If we keep things locked down wating for the "if" a certain variant miraculously becomes a new virus and makes current immunity worthless we will never ever come out of the restrictions. 

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.02.27.433180v1

It's complicated. Science is quite rigorous, and requires large amounts of controlled data, but the exchange is we get extremely reliable figures for the end result. It's why the vaccine trials took so long. How the vaccines effect transmission - we know they reduce it, sort of, from bits of data we have. But we can't scientifically prove it yet.

This is where the divide between scientists and the rest of us come in - the desire to wait on definitive data rather than just a best guess.

[thewayiam]

48 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

The thread is a hive of shit with the occasional great post but while this is the dominant topic that is affecting the world people are going to want to talk about it.
 

If this thread was locked another one would soon pop up. At least the shit is contained within this thread and you can avoid it if you want to.

It’s a shame you can’t block threads from view like you can block users. 

It is indeed.

33 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

That is indeed what I meant! And any further easing would've been a nice surprise, a bonus.

This was quite obvious to be honest. Just too much reading into what wasn't there. It's one extreme too another.

[Havors]

3 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

It's complicated. Science is quite rigorous, and requires large amounts of controlled data, but the exchange is we get extremely reliable figures for the end result. It's why the vaccine trials took so long. How the vaccines effect transmission - we know they reduce it, sort of, from bits of data we have. But we can't scientifically prove it yet.

This is where the divide between scientists and the rest of us come in - the desire to wait on definitive data rather than just a best guess.

I thought the first definitive data had come in? I may have gotten it mixed up with the numerous initial data reports. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

Number 10 now considering surge vaccinations. I think that’s a move we can all get behind. 

[efcfanwirral]

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Number 10 now considering surge vaccinations. I think that’s a move we can all get behind. 

100% - hopefully the whole of greater Manchester, to keep it contained rather than just focusing on Bolton