When will this shit end?

[Stretlow]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm talking about how the public can directly influence the gifts choices. If there's fewer positive tests it gets difficult for the govt to have restrictions because if the virus spreading.its a direct intravention into the process which isn't possible in any other way.joevpublic can't decide that he's not goings to get infected but he can decide how much his infection feeds into the rest of what happens.

 

Fewer tests is fewer positive results which is less need for lockdown measures1.

It's not a perfect intravention into the process but it does influence the data which influences the measures decided via the data.

I never see the accuracy of the tests being discussed either, I'm sure i read they're only 60% accurate ( I could be wrong on that )

If that 60% is true then the case numbers are surely over inflated? However on the other hand there's probably loads of cases where people don't bother to get a test.

This is the reason I think the hospitalisations and deaths are a better guide, I also think they should be publishing the vaccination status of these patients, surely that's much more valuable data to be making these decisions off?

 

[squirrelarmy]

2 minutes ago, Stretlow said:

I'm sure i read they're only 60% accurate

60% of the time they’re accurate every time. 

[zahidf]

18 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm talking about how the public can directly influence the govts choices. If there's fewer positive tests it gets difficult for the govt to have restrictions because of the virus spreading. its a direct intravention into the process which isn't possible in any other way.j Joe public can't decide that he's not going to get infected but he can decide how much his infection feeds into the rest of what happens.

 

Fewer tests is fewer positive results which is less need for lockdown measures.

It's not a perfect intravention into the process but it does influence the data which influences the measures decided via the data.

Not really because the govt will look at positivity as well. So less tests won't necessarily mean you can influence things that way

[Fuzzy Afro]

31 minutes ago, kalifire said:

What's the UK position on booster shots? Has the government made any announcements on them?

I'm wondering if people will be considered as 'vaccinated' after 12 months with no booster...

 

30 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Trials at the moment and agreement with AZN for a new vaccine shot

They have also purchased an additional 60m doses of Pfizer’s original effort after the company confirms it works on all variants and they are not planning to update it, and also they have the full J&J one-and-done supply to come in Q3 after the original rollout is done so this will likely be used for boosters. 

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, aj6658 said:

There is 0 reasons to delay the 21st lifting.  

• Number of cases literally do not matter. Hospitalisations and deaths do. If the number of cases tripled but hospitalisations and deaths still remain low then there is no risk
• We are hovering around a 100 hospitalisations or so a day. As the rollout continues, we shall see this number drop 
• Deaths are now hovering around 10 
• By end of June we will have the high risk groups (which account for 98% of the deaths) double jabbed 
• If you are young you are not at risk which is the majority of the unvaccinated population  

 

Where in the data have we seen a dangerous 3rd wave that is actually going to overwhelm the NHS or cause significant deaths?  

It's in your first point. Exponential growth. If the virus triples in two weeks sure, that's fine. But that means in 2 more weeks it will triple again so now it's 9 times more cases (and hence hospitalisations). In 8 weeks it's 729 times more and in 10 weeks it's 2187 times more. That's the data. 

We *will* get to a point with vaccinations where even if all of the UK got infected, the number of hospitalisations would still be manageable.  But what we can't do is get to a point where a majority of the country are infect before we have that level of vaccination.

[Copperface]

1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

This would be a good move I feel. It’ll be important to have a safety net increase we do need to put in place any restrictions through the Autumn and Winter. 

We can get ready for a proper return to our cultural life in the autumn in the way that everybody would want.

Meanwhile we'll need support for those furloughed in industries that might not be able to reopen during the summer.

[steviewevie]

58 minutes ago, Mellotr0n said:

Of course doing that would mean more undetected spread of the virus which would lead to more hospitalisations and therefore more need for lockdown measures - self defeating tactic, methinks.

yeah, that would make look worse than actually is.

[balthazarstarbuck]

8 minutes ago, Copperface said:

We can get ready for a proper return to our cultural life in the autumn in the way that everybody would want.

Issue with this (and I’m leaning towards backing a 2 week extension) is that it does all tend to go to shit in the winter (as we’re starting to see the in Southern Hemisphere). So the concern would be you’re not just pushing it back for the summer, you’re pushing it back to next summer.

Anyway, Portugal off the green list. Too bloody right. 

[steviewevie]

Portugal being moved to amber?

[efcfanwirral]

 

Just now, steviewevie said:

Portugal being moved to amber?

So we've let them take on the risk of hosting the final and now they have no use to us

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, balthazarstarbuck said:

Issue with this (and I’m leaning towards backing a 2 week extension) is that it does all tend to go to shit in the winter (as we’re starting to see the in Southern Hemisphere). So the concern would be you’re not just pushing it back for the summer, you’re pushing it back to next summer.

 

People wont be putting up with restrictions after 2 jabs. All the patience is gone

[Copperface]

3 minutes ago, balthazarstarbuck said:

Issue with this (and I’m leaning towards backing a 2 week extension) is that it does all tend to go to shit in the winter (as we’re starting to see the in Southern Hemisphere). So the concern would be you’re not just pushing it back for the summer, you’re pushing it back to next summer.

 

I was just being ironic - those words were from Boris Johnson on 24th March so we can't really say that we weren't potentially warned.

https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/1995/default/

A few of of us did flag this when furlough was extended until September but the general agreement was that it was probably more a safety net.

Still, at least it might silence the loons who are convinced that the Coronavirus Act  will be kicked out at the next review. The arrangements for furlough are part of that.

 

[efcfanwirral]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

People wont be putting up with restrictions after 2 jabs. All the patience is gone

That attitude only goes so far - unfortunately if places are closed and event industry decimated then you can't just go to them. The vaccines will probably make it a bit less of a problem for people to meet up privately and not need a full ban, but I'd be shocked if we get through winter with businesses fully open. Allowing them a summer could mean they're still around to open next summer. The more we delay the more businesses are likely to go under over the winter season

[DeanoL]

1 minute ago, balthazarstarbuck said:

Issue with this (and I’m leaning towards backing a 2 week extension) is that it does all tend to go to shit in the winter (as we’re starting to see the in Southern Hemisphere). So the concern would be you’re not just pushing it back for the summer, you’re pushing it back to next summer.

Anyway, Portugal off the green list. Too bloody right. 

But by then everyone will have had two doses of vaccine. We will be "as safe as we'll ever be". Unfortunately that phrase has been diluted a bit because the anti-lockdown hawks have been claiming we're "as safer as we'll ever be" since about March.

If a lockdown needs to happen to stop the NHS being overwhelmed in the winter, it'll happen. Regardless of when we lift the current lockdown. No government is going to go "nah, we said it was over on June 21 so we'll let the bodies pile up in the streets now".

A winter lockdown is *less* likely the more we lockdown now - as we reduce pressure on the NHS, so it can deal with any winter issues as is. It's not *more* likely because of some sort of "lockdown momentum." But there's some sort of narrow pathway we can thread where we open up at some point in the next 3-8 weeks, and still avoid any potential winter issues. We want to pick the earliest possible date that keeps us on that narrow path. That date might not be 21 June - given we have loads more data now than we did when the roadmap came out.

(I actually don't think this year's winter season will be bad at all - the sad reality is that COVID has already killed a huge proportion of the elderly population that are at risk from respiratory illness. Plus people are much more vaccine conscious so we should see an uptick in those getting the flu vaccine, leading to a relatively mild flu season, even with some COVID cases on top)

[zahidf]

 

[JoeyT]

 

[Filthy]

12 minutes ago, zahidf said:

People wont be putting up with restrictions after 2 jabs. All the patience is gone

By "people" you mean you?

[fraybentos1]

2 minutes ago, Filthy said:

By "people" you mean you?

Naive to think there won't be several million more like him (and me to an extent).

Not just the 2 jags, but if deaths stay low then people will start to be like 'what's the point'.

[zahidf]

4 minutes ago, Filthy said:

By "people" you mean you?

Once my friends and family have had two jabs, then thats that for me restrictions wise. 

 

Ill wear a mask if needed on public transport but everything else can get in the bin

[fraybentos1]

5 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

 

That's actually incredible. So, a rate of like a billion doses per month at the moment? Hopefully it keeps picking up and poorer countries are helped so we can end this asap. Obv in an ideal world it would be more equal but that's a fantasy unfortunately. 

[Filthy]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

Naive to think there won't be several million more like him (and me to an extent).

Not just the 2 jags, but if deaths stay low then people will start to be like 'what's the point'.

If deaths and admissions stay low in the next couple of weeks I have no problem with sticking with June 21st but if there is significant uptick then I don't understand how pausing for another 2 weeks is such a big deal considering what we've had to put up with so far

[zahidf]

11 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

But by then everyone will have had two doses of vaccine. We will be "as safe as we'll ever be". Unfortunately that phrase has been diluted a bit because the anti-lockdown hawks have been claiming we're "as safer as we'll ever be" since about March.

If a lockdown needs to happen to stop the NHS being overwhelmed in the winter, it'll happen. Regardless of when we lift the current lockdown. No government is going to go "nah, we said it was over on June 21 so we'll let the bodies pile up in the streets now".

 

But by then everyone who wants one will have had 2 jabs. So this is a new thing, either the vaccines dont work, or the public health wonks are trying to use these new powers for Flu in mission creep

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Joe public can't decide that he's not going to get infected but he can decide how much his infection feeds into the rest of what happens.

He can't decide for sure but he can massively alter his odds one way or the other. 

If people seriously want to impact the figures to ensure 21 June goes ahead, their best course of action is to stay indoors and see as few people as possible.

People won't, of course, because they care more about having their current freedoms than they do about making sure 21 June happens, no matter what they claim on the internet.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, Filthy said:

If deaths and admissions stay low in the next couple of weeks I have no problem with sticking with June 21st but if there is significant uptick then I don't understand how pausing for another 2 weeks is such a big deal considering what we've had to put up with so far

If its just 2 weeks to get more people jab, id reluctantly go along with that.

 

If its 2 weeks 'to assess the evidence' then absolutely not. Thats a excuse to delay stuff further

[Copperface]

I've seen a few restauranteurs etc interviewed recently and for the most part (obviously only the ones I've seen) they've said they would rather stay closed until it was certain they could reopen in a consistent and profitable way, as opposed to a cycle of open/close/open/close and various restrictions which is disruptive and causes them more problems in staff retention and ordering logistics. 

Businesses might be teetering on the edge but a clear path ahead for them is infinitely preferable to constant adapting to new restrictions and rules, harsh though it might sound and they might actually prefer to wait until the critical mass in vaccinations has been reached and confidence is higher..