When will this shit end?

[Mr.Tease]

3 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Given he is a former Prime Minister, I don't think it's unreasonable to think he has access to the best scientific minds and he's not just putting this forward without canvassing their opinion first.

On the surface, its seems a reasonable idea. 

The first vaccine, it turns out, gives much more protection than had been expected so give everyone a one-vaccine regime and we can get the population vaccinated much more quickly, dramatically reducing the death and serious illness numbers.

They won't be 'half-vaccinated'.

 

But didn't the Oxford vaccine trials show the complication of this- half dose plus full dose could equal 90% effectiveness, but 2 full doses could just be 60%, though it's uncertain. Don't think we should go messing about with the doses outside of what has been tested- don't think it's worth the risk at this point, but I am no expert!

[zahidf]

 

[tigger123]

5 minutes ago, Copperface said:

There is still strong representation here by those who believe it'll all be over by Easter and then back home for tea and medals.

While i agree it won’t be fully back to normal at Easter, the pressure from the back benches will be immense which I think will lead to quite a few measures being relaxed. Some are saying the measures at the moment are too tough, so can’t imagine they’ll be sitting quietly when a large portion of the population has been vacccinated, plus we will be entering the warmer months then and cases/deaths this summer where we had no vaccine were comparatively very low to what they are now, definitely low enough not to overwhelm the NHS

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

But didn't the Oxford vaccine trials show the complication of this- half dose plus full dose could equal 90% effectiveness, but 2 full doses could just be 60%, though it's uncertain. Don't think we should go messing about with the doses outside of what has been tested- don't think it's worth the risk at this point, but I am no expert!

Well for the Pfizer one at least the second dose seems somewhat superfluous. From Pfizer's perspective they are happy to receive twice the income though. I don't understand the Astra one well enough to assess but presumably Blair has evaluated it in detail.

[Mr.Tease]

3 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

You keep saying this over and over again. No one expects it to continue at current rate, so I don’t know why you talk like it will be.

Oxford is likely coming online in the next week or two, and numbers are already ramping up significantly prior to that.

People who know far more about the logistics than me or you are still looking at a far more optimistic timeline than you are referring to.

This is unhelpful doom-mongering.

Have they decided what the dosage of the Oxford vaccine will be yet? Are they going to go for the 2 full doses or risk the 1/2 plus full one (which might be more effective but has a smaller sample size)?

[philipsteak]

13 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Whilst I agree with you there’s something i’m noticing here. It seems to be that once you’re vaccinated you still have to wear masks and social distance etc. Maybe there are concerns about the effectiveness of the vaccine and it will need to be a long period of time before we can effectively see the results for ourselves. 

And not wanting to create a situation where some still have to stick to masks and distancing, and some don't. It's an obvious visual reminder that you haven't had the vaccine yet, but your neighbour, say, has

[mcshed]

9 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

you’re vaccinated you still have to wear masks and social distance etc.

Because if you let the vaccinated abandon all that without a proper system in place for proving you've had the vaccine then suddenly loads of people will claim they don't need to do it anymore. Vaccine passports are the obvious answer to this problem but they are unpopular, they may increase in popularity once more people are vaccinated.

[xxialac]

Just now, tigger123 said:

While i agree it won’t be fully back to normal at Easter, the pressure from the back benches will be immense which I think will lead to quite a few measures being relaxed. Some are saying the measures at the moment are too tough, so can’t imagine they’ll be sitting quietly when a large portion of the population has been vacccinated, plus we will be entering the warmer months then and cases/deaths this summer where we had no vaccine were comparatively very low to what they are now, definitely low enough not to overwhelm the NHS

I think you're both saying the same thing.

We'll continue to have restrictive measures by Easter but nothing like as tough as they are now. 

[Copperface]

1 minute ago, Mellotr0n said:

You keep saying this over and over again. No one expects it to continue at current rate, so I don’t know why you talk like it will be.

Oxford is likely coming online in the next week or two, and numbers are already ramping up significantly prior to that.

People who know far more about the logistics than me or you are still looking at a far more optimistic timeline than you are referring to.

This is unhelpful doom-mongering.

Yeah, I've been told that since February this year..

Of course I know that we are in the initial stages. But my point is that claims were being made of, for example, 110,00 vaccinations per week at one single stadium in Bristol, and people were convinced by that, until you looked closer at the actual official source, and saw that  there was no such aim and that some had completely misinterpreted/misunderstood it.

Of course the rate will increase. It will increase to an impressive pace. Not anywhere remotely in the same ball park yet.

But we are currently just pootling along. And every week at this current rate is another week's slippage, and another 800,000 or so to add onto the timescale from when this rapid ramping up starts. Most people seem to be aiming at Easter, so slippage will push this back.

I got called a doom-mongererer 9 or 10 months ago, but have been proved right.

Oh, and I was recalled as an ES resilience planner back in March for the initial response, so I'm fully aware of the logistics, but thanks anyway.

[Fuzzy Afro]

11 minutes ago, Copperface said:

There is still strong representation here by those who believe it'll all be over by Easter and then back home for tea and medals.

 

13 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I think it’s very clear that some restrictions will have to remain in place after the vulnerable have been vaccinated. We won’t be dropping all of them after that has been done as we don’t know the full effects of the vaccine. I think if people think that all restrictions will be dropped once the vulnerable have been vaccinated they’ll be in for a shock. 

 

17 minutes ago, Copperface said:

To start relaxing the rules, no. But many seem to be convinced that as soon as 'the vulnerable', whatever that is , are vaccinated then restrictions can be lifted completely. That initial phase numbers 25 million people, if that is what is classed as 'vulnerable'. It is certainly what PHE has included as a number in the initial high risk group.

Many restrictions will be in place until this 25m have been done, and then after that, a very slow and graduated/flexible lifting/imposition until we hit the 65-70% mark. Most of normality will have returned for 90% of the population, but mass events going to be last on that list.

No one is suggesting that it’s all game over once those 25m are vaccinated. If they are saying that, then they are wrong. Relaxations of restrictions will be based on hospitalisation and death numbers, and the vaccination programme will drive that. Vaccines are the chicken, fewer hospitalisations and deaths are the egg that we need to start easing up.

 

However looking at the JCVI priority groups, groups 5-9 include ALL those from 50-69 and younger patients with underlying health conditions. Groups 1-4 are 70+ and the clinically extremely vulnerable (e.g.

transplant patients or those on chemotherapy, NOT people will medium risk health conditions like diabetes)

 

JVT states that vaccinating groups 1-9 will remove 99% of deaths. These people will hopefully be vaccinated by March/April time. However I’d wager that groups 1-4 alone account for a substantial majority of deaths such that vaccinating people in those groups should seriously ease the pressure on the NHS.

 

My money is that by Easter, the rules will be roughly what they were in summer 2020. That means that we’ll be advised to socialise in groups of 6 only, but legally only gatherings of > 30 will be banned (Much larger limit for organised gatherings such as gigs) and we’ll have a lot of freedom to make our own decisions on how much risk to take. Hand washing, masks and the 1 metre+ rule will remain in place throughout this phase. 

 

I don’t think restrictions will be fully binned until well into the second half of 2021 however we should be in such position by summer that it feels a lot more normal. 

 

 

[Ryan1984]

25 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

 

This has already happened. The xenophobic lot on another forum I’m on are blaming the French/saying they’ve always hated us going back to the war etc. Completely clueless.

[Copperface]

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

 

No one is suggesting that it’s all game over once those 25m are vaccinated. If they are saying that, then they are wrong. Relaxations of restrictions will be based on hospitalisation and death numbers, and the vaccination programme will drive that. Vaccines are the chicken, fewer hospitalisations and deaths are the egg that we need to start easing up.

 

However looking at the JCVI priority groups, groups 5-9 include ALL those from 50-69 and younger patients with underlying health conditions. Groups 1-4 are 70+ and the clinically extremely vulnerable (e.g.

transplant patients or those on chemotherapy, NOT people will medium risk health conditions like diabetes)

 

JVT states that vaccinating groups 1-9 will remove 99% of deaths. These people will hopefully be vaccinated by March/April time. However I’d wager that groups 1-4 alone account for a substantial majority of deaths such that vaccinating people in those groups should seriously ease the pressure on the NHS.

 

My money is that by Easter, the rules will be roughly what they were in summer 2020. That means that we’ll be advised to socialise in groups of 6 only, but legally only gatherings of > 30 will be banned (Much larger limit for organised gatherings such as gigs) and we’ll have a lot of freedom to make our own decisions on how much risk to take. Hand washing, masks and the 1 metre+ rule will remain in place throughout this phase. 

 

I don’t think restrictions will be fully binned until well into the second half of 2021 however we should be in such position by summer that it feels a lot more normal. 

 

 

Which is precisely what I have been saying for months now. Don't think it differs in any way. Apart from your projected timescale is a few months off. I'd go for June/Julyish.

[st dan]

11 minutes ago, xxialac said:

I think you're both saying the same thing.

We'll continue to have restrictive measures by Easter but nothing like as tough as they are now. 

Yep, and it will all be driven be hospital admissions and death numbers, rather than the ‘x positive per 100,000’ and R rates which are the factors we being led by at this stage. 
Naturally as these figures are likely to get down to very low levels anyway in the Spring and summer, coupled with vaccine rollouts for the most vulnerable, I don’t think it’s out the question to expect some things to go back to ‘normal’ over these months - especially pubs, restaurants, bars and nightclubs reopening etc. 
This will all then be reviewed and reassessed in the autumn/winter of 2021, when restrictive measures could be reapplied again. 

[Guest]

But that’s different to suggesting that restrictions in full will be dropped, it’s not wise for that to happen. 

[eFestivals]

34 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Many restrictions will be in place until this 25m have been done, and then after that, a very slow and graduated/flexible lifting/imposition until we hit the 65-70% mark.

I strongly disagree.

As Van-Tam has pointed out, 99% of deaths will be prevented by vaccinating just the oldies & vulnerable.

Govt covid policy has been driven healthcare demand, and if 99% of deaths are prevented then a hell of a lot of hospitalisations also will be.

 

34 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Most of normality will have returned for 90% of the population, but mass events going to be last on that list.

*INDOOR* mass events will be the last on that list.

[Chapple12345]

10 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

My money is that by Easter, the rules will be roughly what they were in summer 2020. That means that we’ll be advised to socialise in groups of 6 only, but legally only gatherings of > 30 will be banned (Much larger limit for organised gatherings such as gigs) and we’ll have a lot of freedom to make our own decisions on how much risk to take. Hand washing, masks and the 1 metre+ rule will remain in place throughout this phase. 

I don’t think restrictions will be fully binned until well into the second half of 2021 however we should be in such position by summer that it feels a lot more normal. 

Completely agree with all of this, next year will be very different in a positive way, still some pleasures but far far less draconian than we've experienced this year

[st dan]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

But that’s different to suggesting that restrictions in full will be dropped, it’s not wise for that to happen. 

I guess a lot of it depends if any restrictive measures become laws/regulations, or simply encouraged advice.
Mask wearing for example, if people aren’t being told they must wear one before entering like we are being told now, and rather then are just ‘advised’ to wear one - then I’m pretty sure the majority of people will start to not bother. Same with the 2m distancing rules etc. 

[Copperface]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

I strongly disagree.

As Van-Tam has pointed out, 99% of deaths will be prevented by vaccinating just the oldies & vulnerable.

Govt covid policy has been driven healthcare demand, and if 99% of deaths are prevented then a hell of a lot of hospitalisations also will be.

 

*INDOOR* mass events will be the last on that list.

You haven't said which bit are you disagreeing with?

As to indoor, probably correct, but still part of mass gatherings as a generic grouping.

[Guest]

I think the point is that we aren’t suggesting events won’t be able to start or these restrictions will stay in place in full. There will be some restrictions in place, we can’t just fully open the door at say Easter when we don’t know what will happen. We have to be cautious. 

[eFestivals]

Just now, Copperface said:

You haven't said which bit are you disagreeing with?

"a very slow and graduated/flexible lifting/imposition until we hit the 65-70% mark"

 

Just now, Copperface said:

As to indoor, probably correct, but still part of mass gatherings as a generic grouping.

Not sure about that. There's been a wide gap for outdoor to indoor rules all the way thru, because the risks have been recognised as hugely different. Plus they're already on the path of opening up outdoor events.

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, squirrelarmy said:

I don’t see a need to put the North up a tier. We seem to have things under control. Not that there’s much difference between tier 3 and 4 anyway post xmas. 

big difference is shops open for boxing day sales...

[xxialac]

9 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I strongly disagree.

As Van-Tam has pointed out, 99% of deaths will be prevented by vaccinating just the oldies & vulnerable.

Govt covid policy has been driven healthcare demand, and if 99% of deaths are prevented then a hell of a lot of hospitalisations also will be.

 

*INDOOR* mass events will be the last on that list.

Totally agree.

Forget hands, face, space, the most important thing you can do to reduce infection is to be outdoors. 

That does give some hope to festivals.

[steviewevie]

39 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Considering Stevie posted the last YouGov poll yesterday, here’s the latest one today:

 

hmmm...I need to find another one with tories in the lead now....because it is important that we remain balanced and impartial on this thread...

[steviewevie]

28 minutes ago, Copperface said:

Yeah, I've been told that since February this year..

Of course I know that we are in the initial stages. But my point is that claims were being made of, for example, 110,00 vaccinations per week at one single stadium in Bristol, and people were convinced by that, until you looked closer at the actual official source, and saw that  there was no such aim and that some had completely misinterpreted/misunderstood it.

Of course the rate will increase. It will increase to an impressive pace. Not anywhere remotely in the same ball park yet.

But we are currently just pootling along. And every week at this current rate is another week's slippage, and another 800,000 or so to add onto the timescale from when this rapid ramping up starts. Most people seem to be aiming at Easter, so slippage will push this back.

I got called a doom-mongererer 9 or 10 months ago, but have been proved right.

Oh, and I was recalled as an ES resilience planner back in March for the initial response, so I'm fully aware of the logistics, but thanks anyway.

this

[alanr]

20 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I strongly disagree.

As Van-Tam has pointed out, 99% of deaths will be prevented by vaccinating just the oldies & vulnerable.

Govt covid policy has been driven healthcare demand, and if 99% of deaths are prevented then a hell of a lot of hospitalisations also will be.

 

*INDOOR* mass events will be the last on that list.

I agree with all this if the 99% figure proves to be correct, but this is still just a prediction and needs to be backed up  by hard evidence as the vaccination program rolls out.