When will this shit end?

[andyrhodes24]

45 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

Book in July for jabs in August was said the other day...  So that would suggest a 4 week window ?  Maybe some young ones can tell us hows it been going ?

I was offered my first one on 5th June, booked it for 12th June and have already booked by second jab for 7th August (exactly eight weeks since my first). I'm 27 and was offered the first one a couple of days before it was opened up to my age group

[steviewevie]

13 minutes ago, zahidf said:

From the Times article. Why on earth aren't the modellers who are apparently on charge now not using the up to date Figures? It's ridiculous

 

For Warwick University's models, that would mean their death estimates could fall from 72,400 to 17,100. While the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said there could be 33,200 deaths in an optimistic scenario.

On Wednesday, MPs on the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee grilled Dr Susan Hopkins about using out of date data in their modelling.

Committee chair Greg Clark, a former Tory science minister, said: 'Wouldn't it have been possible given the relatively new real world data, to say actually, in the light of this data, we need a few more days to assess it, before we decide what is going to be the right implications of public policy?'

He added that the UK's Covid crisis had been 'beset by uncertainties and difficulties with modelling evidence informing government policy decisions'.

Mr Clark called for the models to be redone as soon as possible 'so that, as the Prime Minister promised, a reappraisal can be made and a change made if it's justified'.

Dr Hopkins said she was in 'no doubt' that SAGE would plug the new figures into heir models.

But Tory MP Aaron Bell suggested it was too late and that the new data may have altered 'the case for the continuation of restrictions'.

He added: 'The models that we seem to be relying on to justify the extension of restrictions don't appear to be using [the PHE] numbers.

'This is really important because the number of deaths that those numbers ultimately forecast, are for people who have had both doses, so if they have been using numbers that are now superseded, doesn't that alter the case for the continuation of restrictions?'

'We are voting in the House of Commons on the basis of those models. And it's obviously very good news. These numbers are coming out so far ahead of even the optimistic scenarios that have been modelled.'

17k deaths? What does that mean for hospitalisations?

[steviewevie]

 

[balti-pie]

1 hour ago, Dog Burger said:

Same for us - we had to cancel a two-week trip on Amtrak taking in Seattle, Portland and Vancouver in May 2020. At the time, we thought maybe it would be fine by autumn 2020, then May 2021… We finally rebooked with our BA vouchers a couple of weeks ago for May 2022. Hopefully, surely, it'll be OK by then. 

Have been to NY, Phoenix and San Francisco previously but never been to any American sport, the dates have never worked out. Would love to fit one in this time if possible.

i know this is a bit offtopic, but nevertheless: i've been to baseball in the US, which was alright - its a long, and slightly baffling sport, but the food and drink options are magnificent (the footlong hotdogs at Toronto skydome with about twenty toppings are GREAT) and for people watching, its a good afternoon out. 

i went to basketball, which was meh, but i really recommend ice hockey - its a lot easier to follow when youre there in person, its better than on tv if youve even got the slightest interest in it. Again, the food/drink options tend to be good, and its not only massive NHL teams, theres smaller leagues around the west coast that will have more affordable tickets. I couldnt recommend it higher, the ice hockey is a fantastic night out. 

just got to get to an american football match and ive got a full set - one day ill get to see the mighty chicago bears!

[MrBarry465]

1 hour ago, Barry Fish said:

Yeah but JUST IN CASE!!!  Don't you get it ? 😛   Just waiting on @MrBarry465 to come along and scream at you 🙂 

I'm over arguing it now, the delay is in and things will open in 4 weeks.

I believe the right call was made to delay things by a small time frame (in the grand scehem of things) and play it safe.

[JoeyT]

Zahawi says 18yo's can now book but is quoting an article that says tomorrow... either way if we have any youngun's amongst us give it a go and spread the word...

 

[JoeyT]

 

[zahidf]

12 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

That's... worse then, because that's two pieces of information they missed out of the models!

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, JoeyT said:

 

Points towards strong natural immunity.

[Havors]

13 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

17k deaths? What does that mean for hospitalisations?

Im going to go out on a limb and say their death projections are complete fucking bollocks. 

The cases have been rising since April and deaths are still dropping or staying in single figures. I just dont see how we get to 17k deaths unless the vaccine just doesnt work. And to get to 17k at our current rate the cases would need to keep rising exponentially for months... 

The growth rate is supposedly dropped significantly over the last week so it just all seems like complete bollocks and working on some doomsday bullshit assumptions. 

[Havors]

6 minutes ago, MrBarry465 said:

I'm over arguing it now, the delay is in and things will open in 4 weeks.

I believe the right call was made to delay things by a small time frame (in the grand scehem of things) and play it safe.

I agree to be honest. I can see the justification for the delay as much as we didnt want it or whether we ultimately needed it. It was just caution. Very bad for a lot of people though, hopefully there is some help there for the businesses and others etc

 

[efcfanwirral]

9 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

Zahawi says 18yo's can now book but is quoting an article that says tomorrow... either way if we have any youngun's amongst us give it a go and spread the word...

 

Second time he's done that- not good on details these ministers 😂

[philipsteak]

21 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

 

You'd be properly pissed off if you were one off the 53.

Also, tricky conversation with the boss. 'Covid, is it? Again? Is this like when you went to your grans funeral for the 3rd time? '

[Havors]

5 minutes ago, philipsteak said:

You'd be properly pissed off if you were one off the 53.

Also, tricky conversation with the boss. 'Covid, is it? Again? Is this like when you went to your grans funeral for the 3rd time? '

Would be interesting to see how sick the 53 were... and if any of them were false positives?

Like the italian (i think) footballer who was just constantly testing positive haha 

[DeanoL]

2 hours ago, zahidf said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/summer-covid-death-predictions-downgraded-kbkwkmvjz

vaccine effacacy information from Monday into the models now reduces the summer wave masively

BIG mistake delaying next week

You can't have it both ways though.

It was the anti-lockdown lot that, in January were demanding a full roadmap with target dates and what restrictions would change when. Businesses demanded at least a week's notice to confirm or extend any date. Businesses demanded that any changes be irreversible because the in/out lockdowns of the past year or so have been more damaging than having certainty.

And that was exactly what was delivered.

And now the same people don't like that approach, because data has come in after the 1 week-notice decision point that they insisted on, that potentially changes things. And they don't like that we're being over-cautious, even though we're only being over-cautious because the unlocking needs to be irreversible. So opening up and "seeing how it goes" isn't an option - because businesses and anti-lockdown folk told the government they didn't want that to be an option.

You can have more reactive restrictions and easings that are more closely based on the data and how the situation changes over time, or you can irreversible unlocks with notice periods. Doing both isn't possible.

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

You can't have it both ways though.

It was the anti-lockdown lot that, in January were demanding a full roadmap with target dates and what restrictions would change when. Businesses demanded at least a week's notice to confirm or extend any date. Businesses demanded that any changes be irreversible because the in/out lockdowns of the past year or so have been more damaging than having certainty.

And that was exactly what was delivered.

And now the same people don't like that approach, because data has come in after the 1 week-notice decision point that they insisted on, that potentially changes things. And they don't like that we're being over-cautious, even though we're only being over-cautious because the unlocking needs to be irreversible. So opening up and "seeing how it goes" isn't an option - because businesses and anti-lockdown folk told the government they didn't want that to be an option.

You can have more reactive restrictions and easings that are more closely based on the data and how the situation changes over time, or you can irreversible unlocks with notice periods. Doing both isn't possible.

BJ specifically said that the matter was on daily review on Monday. He could open on time on Monday if they wanted to

[stuie]

1 hour ago, jimmillen said:

That's just not accurate. Managing backups brings a number of negative consequences - cost, complexity, support, regular testing requirements... All sorts of things. Backups are a pain in the arse.

Businesses do them anyway because the potential consequences of data loss are so severe.

I totally agree that the 4-week delay to reopening does have negative consequences, unfortunately.

The potential negative consequences of a hospitalisation wave are much worse. That's why the government made the decision they did.

I know we all bring our own preconceptions to this and for sure we're not all going to agree, but please let's not pretend this was in any way a simple decision. Any choice by the government has negative consequences that need to be balanced against the benefits and risks avoided. 

Sorry, this backup analogy is total rubbish. Backup processes don’t stop you trading whatsoever. If they do, then you need a new IT manager. Covid restrictions are damaging to business. 

[DeanoL]

 

1 hour ago, Barry Fish said:

Did the restrictions make a difference?  

I think proper lockdowns did like we had in March to May(?) and from December to April(?).  Outside of that - I wonder if any of it really makes a difference.  Thank goodness for vaccines and real science.

 

I'm reading a book at the moment called The Premonition by Michael Lewis (who wrote The Big Short) - it traces the history of the US's pandemic response. There's some fascinating stuff about social distancing and the scientific consensus around it. Basically until 2006 it was believed it had minimal to no impact, on the basis that it had been tried in places during the 1918 Flu pandemic with little effect.

But in the early 2000s a bunch of scientists had started to make computer models of human behaviour and contacts, and their models showed that it should have a major effect. But the CDC had rejected all that due to a lack of actual evidence - computer models are not the real world.

So the researchers went back to the 1918 pandemic and tried to piece together as much as they could about infection numbers at the time in different places - and in doing so they were able to prove that places when social events had been banned had fewer cases that would have been expected. There were still lots of cases - hence why this wasn't understood at the time - but that's because most areas locked down too late to have a major impact. But the difference between areas that did and didn't was there. And more pronounced in areas that locked down earlier.

This all happened in 2006, and basically changed our entire approach to dealing with pandemics. Had that research not happened, social distancing would likely never have really been on the table and we'd be looking at a very different world right now. 

[jimmillen]

3 minutes ago, stuie said:

Sorry, this backup analogy is total rubbish. Backup processes don’t stop you trading whatsoever. If they do, then you need a new IT manager. Covid restrictions are damaging to business. 

*Sigh* I'm going to stop after this, 'cos we're disappearing down a rabbit hole of pedantry and nit-picking, but anyway, to be clear: obviously backups don't stop a business trading. That's not the same thing as saying they have no negative consequences - which is the point I was responding to. 

Negative consequences can take any number of forms, financial, reputational, harm to people, public disorder, criminality, health...

In the current covid restrictions scenario the government have accepted the consequences of extending restrictions - damage to businesses, mental health, and so on - as a necessary cost to help avoid the consequences of a harmful wave of hospitalisations.

Anyone is totally within their rights to criticise this decision on the balance of probabilities and risk. But you can't claim that re-opening as planned would have been risk-free either.

[Chapple12345]

 

The best birthday present I could have asked for 🥳

[zahidf]

7 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

 

The best birthday present I could have asked for 🥳

LoCK Up FoR AuguST JuSt in CaSE

[zero000]

8 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

 

The best birthday present I could have asked for 🥳

Are we not in the third wave already? 

[JoeyT]

12 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

 

The best birthday present I could have asked for 🥳

So roughly 1,500 admissions a day (based on Apr 2020 figures) but fewer patients requiring intensive care and overall patients being less sick?

Surely that doesn't even put us close to an overwhelmed NHS?

Edited June 17, 2021 by JoeyT

[stuie]

26 minutes ago, jimmillen said:

*Sigh* I'm going to stop after this, 'cos we're disappearing down a rabbit hole of pedantry and nit-picking, but anyway, to be clear: obviously backups don't stop a business trading. That's not the same thing as saying they have no negative consequences - which is the point I was responding to. 

Negative consequences can take any number of forms, financial, reputational, harm to people, public disorder, criminality, health...

In the current covid restrictions scenario the government have accepted the consequences of extending restrictions - damage to businesses, mental health, and so on - as a necessary cost to help avoid the consequences of a harmful wave of hospitalisations.

Anyone is totally within their rights to criticise this decision on the balance of probabilities and risk. But you can't claim that re-opening as planned would have been risk-free either.

I’m not being pedantic but you guys are trying to compare a routine business practice with restrictions that stop businesses trading - it’s nonsense! 

As of 21st June grass roots music venues and nightclubs will have been closed for 449 days. 

[Chapple12345]

13 minutes ago, zero000 said:

Are we not in the third wave already? 

We are of infections but I believe this is supposed to be the peak of hospitalisations which are far less than the peak last April and the patients are younger so therefore less sick and won't need ICU treatment