When will this shit end?

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Daughter, 21, turned up at local GP vax centre uninvited and was treated to a Pfizerbomb.

She's well happy.

I keep reading bits about young people not being keen on the vax but I know that she and her friends have been trying their luck at various centres over the past couple of weeks. Looks to have paid off.

Nice! Here’s to no side effects for her. 

[JoeyT]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Ah good so you are ignoring the evidence I showed because it doesn’t suit your perception of me. I thought you were a glass half full guy, it doesn’t seem it. 

It is half full, hence why I don’t need to stoop to the pedantic levels you have?

Do you want a slow clap for your 2 positive posts in the last 15 months or will a virtual high five suffice?

[steviewevie]

 

[Copperface]

3 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

It is half full, hence why I don’t need to stoop to the pedantic levels you have?

Do you want a slow clap for your 2 positive posts in the last 15 months or will a virtual high five suffice?

There really isn't positive or negative in all this. No winners anywhere in this.

It is what it is. In any case, those who were more on the realistic side with timescales etc have, overall, been proved more accurate than than those who buried their heads in the sand for whatever reason suits them and projected their own hopes and interpretations based on their own circumstances.

[Ozanne]

9 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

It is half full, hence why I don’t need to stoop to the pedantic levels you have?

Do you want a slow clap for your 2 positive posts in the last 15 months or will a virtual high five suffice?

By pedantic do you mean provide you proof that you were wrong? You were the one that stooped to this level by calling me out needlessly in the first place.

I suggest as your clearly have issues with what I post you put me on ignore so you don’t clutter the thread up by talking about my posts. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

9 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

 

Correct decision. In fact, roll it out to all NHS staff.

[efcfanwirral]

2 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

Correct decision. In fact, roll it out to all NHS staff.

Then mandatory for everyone presumably?

[efcfanwirral]

 

18 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Daughter, 21, turned up at local GP vax centre uninvited and was treated to a Pfizerbomb.

She's well happy.

I keep reading bits about young people not being keen on the vax but I know that she and her friends have been trying their luck at various centres over the past couple of weeks. Looks to have paid off.

I think the speed they've got down to the ages they're at now tells a story. 19th delay will be blamed on low uptake 

[Fuzzy Afro]

3 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Then mandatory for everyone presumably?

No. Why would it be compulsory for everyone?

[Fuzzy Afro]

3 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

I think the speed they've got down to the ages they're at now tells a story. 19th delay will be blamed on low uptake 

Let me stop you there.

 

Short of the emergence of another variant that is either more transmissible or better at escaping the vaccines, the 19th July isn't getting delayed. You can mark my words on that.

[incident]

11 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

That chap was very accurate back in the Autumn and I’ve found to be a good balanced source of info as he mainly sticks to the numbers through his calculations. Just because he’s showing some slightly negative information now is only because the situation itself is like that. He deserves to be heard from his past input on the pandemic in my mind. 

I don't mind so if the information is negative, and I'm not doubting the accuracy in isolation of what he's posted or accusing him of twisting data - but what does my head in is where it's presented out of context or incomplete, or at least appears to be so as the accompanying text doesn't really say why it's constrained - and I've noticed that from him a few times in the past couple weeks.

I tend to think that providing any needed context and/or explaining why it doesn't include something or cover a wider timescale should be a minimum expectation from any graph. I can't promise I've always managed that, but I do mostly try (and I don't think my posts are being read by potentially hundreds of thousands of people).

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

I think the speed they've got down to the ages they're at now tells a story. 19th delay will be blamed on low uptake 

Once they’ve offered … they will struggle to justify restrictions even if the uptake is lower … and we don’t know if it is yet … just that they offered it to a larger group in a few bursts to prevent overloading of the website … risk being similar to those age groups 

[incident]

8 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Then mandatory for everyone presumably?

Everyone who's job involves routinely interacting with potentially vulnerable or immunosuppresed people - probably, as there's a clearly defined reason why.

Everyone else - no.

Edited June 15, 2021 by incident

[steviewevie]

France are jabbing 12 year olds.

[Ozanne]

8 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

I think the speed they've got down to the ages they're at now tells a story. 19th delay will be blamed on low uptake 

Sorry, I don’t follow? Why would the 19th be delayed?

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, incident said:

I don't mind so if the information is negative, and I'm not doubting the accuracy in isolation of what he's posted or accusing him of twisting data - but what does my head in is where it's presented out of context or incomplete, or at least appears to be so as the accompanying text doesn't really say why it's constrained - and I've noticed that from him a few times in the past couple weeks.

I tend to think that providing any needed context and/or explaining why it doesn't include something or cover a wider timescale should be a minimum expectation from any graph. I can't promise I've always managed that, but I do mostly try (and I don't think my posts are being read by potentially hundreds of thousands of people).

He's just showing the rate that it's rising. We know from the past how rapidly things can get out of control so he's tracking if the gradient to see which way it's going.

[efcfanwirral]

6 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Sorry, I don’t follow? Why would the 19th be delayed?

I still believe they're drip feeding waiting till a certain percentage have two doses, and that means younger too 

[incident]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

He's just showing the rate that it's rising. We know from the past how rapidly things can get out of control so he's tracking if the gradient to see which way it's going.

In this case that wasn't the graph he was showing.. He was showing how Cases translate to Hospitalisations and therefore the link wasn't broken.

Which is fine except that it would have been more responsible to show that while a link still exists it's dramatically changed compared to ~5 months ago.

[steviewevie]

Just now, efcfanwirral said:

I still believe they're drip feeding waiting till a certain percentage have two doses, and that means younger too 

I don't know, if that's the case wouldn't it have been better to be upfront about that from the start? 

[steviewevie]

Just now, incident said:

In this case that wasn't the graph he was showing.. He was showing how Cases translate to Hospitalisations and therefore the link wasn't broken.

Which is fine except that it would have been more responsible to show that while a link still exists it's dramatically changed compared to ~5 months ago.

Oh, right.

[incident]

3 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I still believe they're drip feeding waiting till a certain percentage have two doses, and that means younger too 

If there's one way to ensure that the <5% of recusants absolutely certain that they're right to refuse a jab, it's to tell them that the jab is mandatory.

Come to think of it, if that happens I'll probably start to think they've got a good point.

[Fuzzy Afro]

6 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I still believe they're drip feeding waiting till a certain percentage have two doses, and that means younger too 

I like you and you usually post decent content, but with all due respect, you are talking absolute rubbish.

[Copperface]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

I don't know, if that's the case wouldn't it have been better to be upfront about that from the start? 

I think to be fair that they were from pretty much early on, last summer in fact, but were apprehensive about publicising it too much in case the rollout kept hitting delays and caused the public mood to turn.  Now that the programme has steamed steadily ahead and were are on course and nearly there it's more acceptable to put it out there. 

[stuartbert two hats]

40 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

Good.  Last time I checked, the levels were shockingly low for people working in such a position.

[JoeyT]