When will this shit end?

[Havors]

6 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Or if something else happens, like dropping all restrictions on Monday...

Haha maybe. If you have a read of the other twitter post I put up, there is good reason to think that the models have completely underestimated phase 3 mobility and that phase 4 has a good chance of not being much different than we have had the past month anyway. 

I mean look at the scenes all through the euros... not sure how it could get any worse than that? I think the vaccine wall will cause us to peak sooner rather than later. 

 

Added the link:

 

 

Edited July 16, 2021 by Havors

[stuartbert two hats]

1 minute ago, Havors said:

Haha maybe. If you have a read of the other twitter post I put up, there is good reason to think that the models have completely underestimated phase 3 mobility and that phase 4 has a good chance of not being much different than we have had the past month anyway. 

I mean look at the scenes all through the euros... not sure how it could get any worse than that? I think the vaccine wall will cause us to peak sooner rather than later. 

I'm still four pages behind!

But yes, it wouldn't surprise me if this step isn't as big as the last one.  I'm still pretty convinced indoor hospitality is the big restriction.  Sure, nightclubs transmit more, but there are fewer nightclubs than pubs+restaurants+softplay+swimming pools (Etc)

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I'm still four pages behind!

But yes, it wouldn't surprise me if this step isn't as big as the last one.  I'm still pretty convinced indoor hospitality is the big restriction.  Sure, nightclubs transmit more, but there are fewer nightclubs than pubs+restaurants+softplay+swimming pools (Etc)

I personally think it’s indoor household mixing. Although that’s not really a policeable restriction and it was definitely going on during stage 2 (and to a lesser extent during stage 1 and even the lockdown) 

 

 

I really struggle to think of a time in the pandemic when cases have been falling despite indoor household mixing being allowed. 

[Havors]

Just now, Barry Fish said:

The average 18 to 30 year old isn't filling out polls...

They are at the football, cricket and theme parks etc - and they are rammed with no social distancing and very few fucks beings given.

Ive never been asked questions for a poll... and i don't know anybody else who has in my circle. Maybe they just avoid Liverpool? 😄 

[Matt42]

23 minutes ago, Havors said:

Makes me sick that shit. Even if you dont agree and you think she is being overly cautious where the fuck do people get off mocking her? If she wants to do whatever she wants to do then leave her to it. 

Arseholes. Just like the ones on the opposite side of the debate. 

As for special dispensation for clinically vulnerable I think it would be a brilliant idea and should be encouraged. 

Yes I agree - I think that special treatment for the clinically vulnerable should be the next step. I think we should be mindful of those vulnerable by not necessarily chucking them in the deep end by forcing them to reintegrating into society.

I.e - if you’re fit and healthy live your life as normal, but there should be special measures to help those who can’t do that. I.e work from home / home deliveries. If people who are very vulnerable need to stay at home permanently there should be measures to help them. 

Edited July 16, 2021 by Matt42

[Fuzzy Afro]

4 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

What an absolute whopper of a call.  

I will never condone people laughing in her face about her wearing a mask and trying to keep 2 meters distance.  That is her personal decision to take.  Let's take that out of the call because none of us are going to be okay with that.

But she declares herself as vulnerable and terrified of the virus - and she clearly is terrified.  Unless she can't take the vaccine I think she needs some counselling and support in getting over those fears.  They are probably largely unjustified and unbalanced.

As for the school closing just in case - madness.  

Is there an actual cohort of people who are so vulnerable they they don’t even get to take the vaccine at all? For all the talk of immunosuppressed people, I thought it was just less likely to work (I saw a stat that they’re something like 74% effective as opposed to 90%+ in the general population)

 

We can’t go shutting society down to protect a small group of people especially when the jab is working relatively well for this group. 

[Toilet Duck]

3 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Is there an actual cohort of people who are so vulnerable they they don’t even get to take the vaccine at all? 

It's not so much that there's a group of people that are so vulnerable they can't get it (there may be some who are very frail and it's not considered suitable at the moment), but the only listed contraindications currently are those with either a history of severe allergic reactions to injectable therapies/vaccines or those that have an immediate allergic reaction to these vaccines (and are recommended not to get the second shot). There are also precautions for those with certain underlying autoimmune diseases. In some cases, the allergy is related to specific components of the vaccine (so, people with a PEG allergy for example could switch from the mRNA vaccines to the J&J one), in others, their allergy is anything injected. It's not a massive amount of people, but they exist. The current contraindications and precautions list is the interim guidance for their use, as we accrue more data that could always change (you've seen the guidance change a number of times over the last while, especially for the adenoviral vectored ones). 

[kalifire]

7 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

We can’t go shutting society down to protect a small group of people especially when the jab is working relatively well for this group. 

True enough, but neither should they be left to suffer. Even at the best of times, I think there are some in society on the edge of real anxiety and mental distress, and just about holding on. Many will have been tipped over the edge by the last couple of years, and as a society we need to make sure they’re cared for. 

When it’s impractical to keep life locked down for the rest of us, I think there should be some kind of support infrastructure and space for the vulnerable to cope. I’m not clever enough to know what that looks like, but I’d happily contribute towards a charity working to provide it, at the very least as a gesture of appreciation for the sacrifice they’re making so I can enjoy more freedoms. 

[BobWillis2]

6 minutes ago, kalifire said:

True enough, but neither should they be left to suffer. Even at the best of times, I think there are some in society on the edge of real anxiety and mental distress, and just about holding on. Many will have been tipped over the edge by the last couple of years, and as a society we need to make sure they’re cared for. 

Equally there is a sizeable number of people who have been unable to do the things that help them with their mental health because they’ve been shut down 
 

There’s always two sides to a coin. 

[Matt42]

10 minutes ago, kalifire said:

True enough, but neither should they be left to suffer. Even at the best of times, I think there are some in society on the edge of real anxiety and mental distress, and just about holding on. Many will have been tipped over the edge by the last couple of years, and as a society we need to make sure they’re cared for. 

When it’s impractical to keep life locked down for the rest of us, I think there should be some kind of support infrastructure and space for the vulnerable to cope. I’m not clever enough to know what that looks like, but I’d happily contribute towards a charity working to provide it, at the very least as a gesture of appreciation for the sacrifice they’re making so I can enjoy more freedoms. 

I think they need to be kept at home if they are as vulnerable as they say they are. I think they should probably have heavy restrictions on where they can go and what they can do. Because the ordinary world is too much of a risk for them.

Making the entire world stop for them is the disproportionate response. The best thing to do is to treat them how they need to be treated and make allowances with work, and activities / events they are allowed to attend. Just like people with heart conditions are banned from rollercoasters we should probably ban them from pubs and supermarkets. This is on the basis that they are as vulnerable as they claim to be.

[DeanoL]

So is it going to keep spreading until everyone's had it, so there's no point in any restrictions? Because I was laughed out the room a month ago when I suggested that.

Or is it going to spread, reach a plateau, then see cases fall as between vaccine and natural immunity there's a level of herd immunity out there which means there's nowhere for it to really go (notwithstanding there will still be the odd pocket of outbreaks from time to time).

Because people seem to be suggesting it's the latter, then saying we can't protect the vulnerable like that caller forever. But if it's the latter, we don't need to protect them forever. We just need to protect them during this final wave right?

Edited July 16, 2021 by DeanoL

[Matt42]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

So is it going to keep spreading until everyone's had it, so there's no point in any restrictions? Because I was laughed out the room a month ago when I suggested that.

Or is it going to spread, reach a plateau, then see cases fall as between vaccine and natural immunity there's a level of herd immunity out there which means there's nowhere for it to really go (notwithstanding there will still be the odd pocket of outbreaks from time to time).

Because people seem to be suggesting it's the latter, then saying we can't protect the vulnerable like that caller forever. But if it's the latter, we don't need to protect them forever. We just need to protect them during this final wave right?

No no no if they are as vulnerable as they claim they are we need to implement measures for them to be kept at home indefinitely. The real world is clearly far too dangerous to them, and I think measures should be put in place to keep them away from pubs, social activities, flights, gigs etc.

Edited July 16, 2021 by Matt42

[st dan]

Just been for my haircut - my barber said him and all his staff will be stopping wearing masks from Monday. Said they are fed up of wearing them all day, especially in the heat. Hard to disagree with him on one hand, but on the other I was thinking let’s hope none of them get covid, as how many customers could they pass this on to in just a couple of days. 

[Guest]

 

[DeanoL]

9 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I think both outcomes are possible although I find it highly unlikely someone can avoid it forever.  Its just so easily spread.

Either way - I think it stands to reason (and its what I would be doing) that if you are so highly vulnerable that you can't have the vaccine then the safest choice right now is for them to stay at home either in the short term or more likely for the long term.  So obviously you can't stay in your house forever - but certain sections of society need to operate some self preservation and make decisions on if they want to go to a crowded pub - rather than expect that pub to be socially distanced.

But vaccines are what, 99% effective? On a good day? So you're double jabbed, your chances of getting seriously ill from it drop by a factor of 100 right?

But surely it stands to reason that if there's 48000 cases in the UK today, your chance of getting it will be 100x less when there's only 480 cases? So it's equivalent to having a vaccine, basically?

I'm not sure on this at all, just trying to think it through so feel free to correct. It just feels like if I'm vulnerable, and one day there are 100 more cases countrywide than another day, I'm 100 times more at risk surely? And cutting people's risk by a factor of 100 is kinda what the vaccines do?

So it's legit to protect vulnerable people a bit more while we go through this peak. Though I'd agree that masks aren't nearly enough to do that - we need prioritised home delivery from supermarkets, exemptions from office working, etc.

[jannybruck]

3 minutes ago, st dan said:

Just been for my haircut - my barber said him and all his staff will be stopping wearing masks from Monday. Said they are fed up of wearing them all day, especially in the heat. Hard to disagree with him on one hand, but on the other I was thinking let’s hope none of them get covid, as how many customers could they pass this on to in just a couple of days. 

Every time I've been to the barbers they've spent 30 minutes in close contact with me masked up, all in my face because of the nature of the job. There's no way around it – they'd absolutely pass it on to me regardless of what they were wearing.

The dominating media narrative over the past couple of months has galvanized into "wearing a mask = safe = not passing it on" when there's so many more variables than that.

[Guest]

Vaccination update:

[andyrhodes24]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

 

BBC notification said it's the highest number since January. The 15th to be precise, when there were 55,000 cases but 1,280 deaths just a few days before we hit the peak of deaths in the second wave

(not saying there'll be any correlation btw)

[zahidf]

Fake sage says  LOCKDOWN 

 

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Fake sage says  LOCKDOWN 

 

BURN HER!

[steviewevie]

GreenMan is on.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Fake sage says  LOCKDOWN 

 

She actually says go back to step 2, not saying I agree just clarifying her actual comments. 

[andyrhodes24]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Fake sage says  LOCKDOWN 

 

Trying not to engage with any of the Pagel stuff but we won't be back to May levels til god knows when. I'm on the side of thinking restrictions will be brought back in the September review but you've got to take the chance to unlock, especially now it's politically impossible to turn back

[Guest]

 

[BobWillis2]

Stage 2 😂😂