When will this shit end?

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I've just thought - this whole "ongoing forever vaccination" idea around variants is going to be HUGE money for some of the government's mates. The NHS surely needs to go back to its "day job" after the first round is done and deal with the fall out of so much delayed treatments and missed diagnoses. Any booster follow-ups (permanent population wide vaccination) will need to be outsourced, and we know where those contracts will go. Can't see how that will go wrong at all...

thats sounds vaguley consiracy theoryesque....

[Ozanne]

Vaccination update:

[steviewevie]

 

[Crazyfool01]

Covid: New Oxford vaccine 'ready by the autumn' to tackle mutations

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55917793

[steviewevie]

Will UK govt now trigger Article 16...

 

[efcfanwirral]

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

thats sounds vaguley consiracy theoryesque....

more competency worries - after the mess of test and trace, can you imagine the same sorts of people (perhaps even the same company) dealing with mass ongoing vaccinations?

[Ozanne]

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

Good on him for owning the mistake. It’s kind of refreshing.

[zahidf]

https://www.thelocal.ch/20210203/insufficient-data-switzerland-declines-to-approve-astrazeneca-vaccine

 

Switzerland wont use the Oxford vaccine

[st dan]

I really really hope the Oxford/AZ vaccine with a 12 week gap proves to be the most effective method when the real life data starts trickling down. 

[Quark]

I can see where @gizmoman is going with the vaccine to travel thing.  The risk of things like that is that they set a precedent and allow frameworks to be put in place.  While that might be done with the right intentions at the time (i.e. controlling a global pandemic), how do we ensure that they don't subsequently become an accepted norm and extend to other areas? At what point does the sharing of private medical information become a requirement? 

I don't think it's conspiracy or paranoia to see how such things could present opportunities for misuse in the future. They are some valid questions that are worth asking.

I think anything like that would need to be clearly time limited and very tightly controlled as a starting point.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Quark

[xxialac]

12 minutes ago, zahidf said:

https://www.thelocal.ch/20210203/insufficient-data-switzerland-declines-to-approve-astrazeneca-vaccine

 

Switzerland wont use the Oxford vaccine

Bloody EU!

[efcfanwirral]

1 minute ago, Quark said:

I can see where Gizmoman is going with the vaccine to travel thing.  The risk of things like that is that they set a precedent and allow frameworks to be put in place.  While that might be done with the right intentions at the time (i.e. controlling a global pandemic), how do we ensure that they don't subsequently become an accepted norm and extend to other areas? At what point does the sharing of private medical information become a requirement? 

I don't think it's conspiracy or paranoia to see how such things could present opportunities for misuse in the future. They are some valid questions that are worth asking.

I think anything like that would need to be clearly time limited and very tightly controlled as a starting point.

On the time limited thing - surely if the risk is that people who haven't been vaccinated spread the virus and we need to stop that, then we need to wait until children have been vaccinated before they're allowed in these places? If they're spreading it to their parents from school, surely they can spread it in restaurants/planes/on holiday etc? That adds to the timescale by quite a considerable amount considering there aren't currently plans to vaccinate them. I know this strange logic that they don't spread it is still around but clearly if they weren't spreading it, they would be in school now?

[steviewevie]

[xxialac]

4 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

On the time limited thing - surely if the risk is that people who haven't been vaccinated spread the virus and we need to stop that, then we need to wait until children have been vaccinated before they're allowed in these places? If they're spreading it to their parents from school, surely they can spread it in restaurants/planes/on holiday etc? That adds to the timescale by quite a considerable amount considering there aren't currently plans to vaccinate them. I know this strange logic that they don't spread it is still around but clearly if they weren't spreading it, they would be in school now?

Very good point. I'm afraid sadly that just extends the timeline when we'll get back to 'full normal'.

They can be tested for e.g. holidays and I think we will end up with a hybrid vaccine/test model for this. 

[Quark]

8 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

On the time limited thing - surely if the risk is that people who haven't been vaccinated spread the virus and we need to stop that, then we need to wait until children have been vaccinated before they're allowed in these places? If they're spreading it to their parents from school, surely they can spread it in restaurants/planes/on holiday etc? That adds to the timescale by quite a considerable amount considering there aren't currently plans to vaccinate them. I know this strange logic that they don't spread it is still around but clearly if they weren't spreading it, they would be in school now?

When I say time limited I'm thinking more in terms of the powers / framework for provision of any medical data to be time limited.  So like the govt's restrictions are agreed for a period of 3 months or whatever it is, then they have to go back before parliament.

If private companies are going to be looking for a mechanism by which they can require me to share my medical data in order to obtain services, I'd want that mechanism to be time limited.

So taking the example of gig tickets, as that's where this started I think.  I would be looking for some kind of legal or legislative approach that says they are allowed to what is essentially discriminate (best word I can think of) who they provide their service to on the basis of whether or not someone's had a vaccine until a fixed date - let's say 31st Dec 2021 for argument's sake. At that point they would legally no longer be able to discriminate on that basis unless the approach is legally extended.

Basically I don't want companies to be able to have that framework there indefinitely.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Quark

[hodgey123]

33 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Vaccination update:

Thanks! Think it would be a good idea to include another column (maybe instead of the % change) with a week-on-week comparison. Obviously the data is there to interpret ourselves but just an idea and think it's more useful than the % change data (although beggars can't be choosers and it's your table!).

[zahidf]

 

[xxialac]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

 

Generous and now wise too.

And people say she's just a pair of tits...

[hodgey123]

On the cases, although the number is going down is anyone still concerned that we are reporting 19,000 cases a day still? This is the fifth week of lockdown now, so these are not cases that are now just showing 10-14 days after the initial infection. We all know that some businesses are still open this time that weren't before and that likely is driving transmission, as well as hospitals, but surely not to the tune of 19,000 cases a day (compared to much lower case rates in June and July)?

[Quark]

If we go full 30 years into the future dystopia approach, I don't want something put in place to control C19 still being used by companies, and airlines refusing to fly people because they have been required to share their medical history and are shown to be HIV positive, and the airline feels that is a risk. Or I personally can't fly unless I agree to share my full medical history as a condition of purchase, and they are legally allowed to do that.

That's a shit example plucked from the air (pun not intended) but it illustrates how such a framework could become the norm, then become embedded, and ultimately become misused.

[Toilet Duck]

1 hour ago, gizmoman said:

Which vaccine? Any of the available Covid shots? what if they decide only the AZ shot is acceptable or they want you to get it every 6 months "just to be sure" you are fully covered. Once we have all been pressured into the Covid shot what about people who refuse the Flu vaccine, are they to be banned too?  This is why we are not going back to a normal life, everyone has been brainwashed into accepting a fascistic "new normal" in which the state dictates every aspect of your life. These big companies such as Eventim seem pretty keen on it all. Eventim is a ticket seller, they have no business deciding who can and can't buy from them, the promoter is the one who sets t&c's for an event. Your personal medical history should be private they have no right to be demanding your personal details. In any case having the vaccine does not wholly prevent you passing on an infection so why do we need this policy? The unvaccinated would be the ones taking any risk at their own choice so what's the problem?

Upvoted to balance out the huge amount of downvotes! I think 6 downvotes is a bit harsh here. I’m with @Quark on this one. There are some very valid questions to be asked and we shouldn’t  just completely accept erosion of our rights because we are all sick of being stuck in and want to do stuff again. I do understand the logic of asking for proof of vaccination (and indeed there are many countries that require certain shots before you can enter), but as citizens I think it’s important that this works for us.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Toilet Duck
Typos!

[Ozanne]

6 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

Thanks! Think it would be a good idea to include another column (maybe instead of the % change) with a week-on-week comparison. Obviously the data is there to interpret ourselves but just an idea and think it's more useful than the % change data (although beggars can't be choosers and it's your table!).

I've been posting a weekly change on Monday's but I've added a weekly change and change percentage, what do you think?

[Quark]

1 minute ago, Toilet Duck said:

I do understand the logic of asking for proof of vaccination (and indeed there are many countries that require certain shots before you can enter), but as citizens I think it’s important that this works for us.

That was actually something I was going to ask (not you specifically, you field enough bloody questions 😄 )

I've not been to countries where shots have been an issue, but I was going to ask whether the shots you need to get are advisory or required. And if they're required, is the sharing of that information with the respective government agencies rather than airlines or similar?

[zahidf]

6 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

On the cases, although the number is going down is anyone still concerned that we are reporting 19,000 cases a day still? This is the fifth week of lockdown now, so these are not cases that are now just showing 10-14 days after the initial infection. We all know that some businesses are still open this time that weren't before and that likely is driving transmission, as well as hospitals, but surely not to the tune of 19,000 cases a day (compared to much lower case rates in June and July)?

Its pretty much in line with last time (halving every 14 days or so). Hopefully though will have a faster reduction when more rhe vaccine impact feeds into it

[PM87]

22 minutes ago, st dan said:

I really really hope the Oxford/AZ vaccine with a 12 week gap proves to be the most effective method when the real life data starts trickling down. 

Me too! And I hope trial data from the US is released soon and confirms that efficacy is also high in the over 65s. It's a bit of a mess tbh. I feel like the Ox/Az vaccine needs a serious PR job at this point.