Will the 2021 festival go ahead?

[stuartbert two hats]

On 12/24/2020 at 11:41 AM, DeanoL said:

 

It won’t be normal if it does happen. Some things are unavoidable: most attendees will not have been vaccinated, and it will be one of if not the first such post-pandemic events of its size in the world.

Even if no rules are in place, guidance will still hedge bets with “be careful” and even if you are able to throw of a year of conditioning to avoid unnecessary contact and be conscious of your personal space and what you touch, tens of thousands won’t. It’ll be weird regardless (unless maybe it happens in September.)

That's why it's not happening.

[Crazyfool01]

1 hour ago, squirrelarmy said:

At Leeds you’ll be lucky if that half pint of liquid is actually beer. 

they dont waste beer in Leeds then ? too tight ? 🙂 

[stuartbert two hats]

On 12/24/2020 at 12:42 PM, incident said:

That tweet is making a huge and questionable assumption that the Oxford/AZ vaccine is actually offered to those over 80 once it's approved.

Given that the 1.5 dose regiment is shown to be both more effective and efficient, especially at reducing transmission, then scientifically it'd make infinitely more sense to have that as the preferred option - but that regiment hasn't been tested on anyone over 55 and so it wouldn't be right to offer it to people 70+. They'd need to be offered the far less effective but tested 2 dose regiment.

I think there's a pretty strong scientific justification that over ~70 are exclusively offered Pfizer (and Moderna when it lands) until more data is available, and that the Oxford/AZ supplies are used at 1.5 doses to start straight away on the younger population as that regiment can be shown to significantly cut infectiousness. But obviously these are complex questions and at least part of the reason why they're taking their time analysing the data and options. And obviously there's a reasonable chance that Boris etc decide that politically they don't want to be seen to vaccinate low risk groups when high risk groups are still waiting.

That's my thinking too. Which means it will take a bit longer to get through the old people, but could actually lead to the cases falling more quickly.

[Dark Star]

3 hours ago, Ryan1984 said:

I know Spaffer has to deal with the pure evil backbenchers but I wonder if we’ll have a slower reopening this time around.

I’ve said before I see a ‘bounce back Britain’ campaign led by the Bond film release, but can see it being more gradual with limited capacity  rather than having Eat Out to Help Out and the ‘Get back in the office, you lazy pricks’ messaging?

See, here's the thing, all the elderly and vulnerable are vaccinated and we go back to normal, whatever that may look like, I'm sure big companies will want people back in their massive offices ASAP to justify their rent. At this point covid will then likely sweep through their workplaces and result in lots of staff sickness. We'll potentially have the hospital capacity to deal with it as the vulnerable should already have been taken care of. However, these businesses currently getting by with staff working safely from home could then find themselves completely screwed over by offices being taken out after a get back to work message comes out from government (which it will undoubtedly do). I'm not sure we can sort the vulnerable and then open back up quickly, much as I want normality back. We need more vaccines and, crucially, lots more people trained to provide these. 

[Lycra]

1 hour ago, stuartbert two hats said:

That's my thinking too. Which means it will take a bit longer to get through the old people, but could actually lead to the cases falling more quickly.

Now throw the new corona virus strain into the mix, which is very likely to become the dominant UK strain. None of the vaccines developed to date have any clinical data demonstrating their efficacy against this strain, or the South African strain. We are entering a big experiment.

Further mutation of corona virus could render the vaccines developed so far ineffective.......or brilliant 🤔

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 hour ago, Dark Star said:

See, here's the thing, all the elderly and vulnerable are vaccinated and we go back to normal, whatever that may look like, I'm sure big companies will want people back in their massive offices ASAP to justify their rent. At this point covid will then likely sweep through their workplaces and result in lots of staff sickness. We'll potentially have the hospital capacity to deal with it as the vulnerable should already have been taken care of. However, these businesses currently getting by with staff working safely from home could then find themselves completely screwed over by offices being taken out after a get back to work message comes out from government (which it will undoubtedly do). I'm not sure we can sort the vulnerable and then open back up quickly, much as I want normality back. We need more vaccines and, crucially, lots more people trained to provide these. 

Just like at the start of the pandemic when 99% of office based employers made their own decisions to shut offices ahead of government guidance, businesses will do what’s best for them, not what Boris tells them. They won’t drag everyone back into the office if they think it will increase sickness dramatically, although even now at most about 1% of the population have it at any one time, so it’s relatively unlikely anyway. 

[Lycra]

Over to Donald Rumsfeld  to sum up the current situation......

"because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know"

Edited December 26, 2020 by Lycra

[petewilson09]

5 minutes ago, Lycra said:

Over to Donald Rumsfeld  to sum up the current situation......

"because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know"

Yea but they don't know we know they know we know. 

[stuartbert two hats]

14 minutes ago, Lycra said:

Now throw the new corona virus strain into the mix, which is very likely to become the dominant UK strain. None of the vaccines developed to date have any clinical data demonstrating their efficacy against this strain, or the South African strain. We are entering a big experiment.

Further mutation of corona virus could render the vaccines developed so far ineffective.......or brilliant 🤔

Lots could happen. For the time being, the best science seems to point towards existing vaccines being effective. And both the Oxford adenovirus and the mRNA vaccines are easily (and quickly) reconfigurable if there has been enough genetic change to reduce the current vaccine efficacy.

Edited December 26, 2020 by stuartbert two hats

[Lycra]

13 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Lots could happen. For the time being, the best science seems to point towards existing vaccines being effective. And both the Oxford adenovirus and the mRNA vaccines are easily (and quickly) reconfigurable if there has been enough genetic change to reduce the current vaccine efficacy.

Yes they can but it still takes a finite time. Regulators will want to see data on a revised vaccine proving safety & efficacy.

It's in global interests vaccination begins and there is a rapid rollout everywhere to control & hopefully eliminate the virus to prevent the risk of it mutating further.

Edited December 26, 2020 by Lycra

[DeanoL]

2 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Right, so you’ll stay indoors even if everything has gone back to normal?

Until I get my vaccine I will. We’ll have had a year of these restrictions, I’ve not caught it yet, I’m not going to go out and risk getting it when I can get vaccinated a few months later. I don’t think that’s particularly crazy. 

2 hours ago, stuartbert two hats said:

That's why it's not happening.

Yup

[DeanoL]

The other thing is, I don’t think as a nation we are so selfless that people following the rules currently are doing it purely because they are worried about other people getting sick. 
We have the level of compliance we have (which is still actually pretty high) because people are, at least in part, worried about getting sick themselves.

Those odds don’t change when the vulnerable are vaccinated, except for the vulnerable.

I’m sure some people here and everywhere are following the rules purely out of civic duty, but at least with my friends there’s also an underlying desire not to actually get sick (in part from seeing some friends get sick and still be feeling the after-effects months on).

[zahidf]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

The other thing is, I don’t think as a nation we are so selfless that people following the rules currently are doing it purely because they are worried about other people getting sick. 
We have the level of compliance we have (which is still actually pretty high) because people are, at least in part, worried about getting sick themselves.

Those odds don’t change when the vulnerable are vaccinated, except for the vulnerable.

I’m sure some people here and everywhere are following the rules purely out of civic duty, but at least with my friends there’s also an underlying desire not to actually get sick (in part from seeing some friends get sick and still be feeling the after-effects months on).

If we had lockdown for 3 months I'd agree. More than a year though? Different story. People are sick of being locked down.

 

 

Under this, vaccinations should be done by Easter.

Edited December 26, 2020 by zahidf

[incident]

5 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Under this, vaccinations should be done by Easter.

Can't predict a schedule by extrapolating quite like that though - partly because it'll start slowing down once people need their second doses, and partly because supply will become an issue in the medium term- Oxford/AZ do have a lot of doses (several million) near enough ready to go, but once we burn through those we'll be constrained by manufacturing capacity for a while until more vaccines are approved.

[zahidf]

5 minutes ago, incident said:

Can't predict a schedule by extrapolating quite like that though - partly because it'll start slowing down once people need their second doses, and partly because supply will become an issue in the medium term- Oxford/AZ do have a lot of doses (several million) near enough ready to go, but once we burn through those we'll be constrained by manufacturing capacity for a while until more vaccines are approved.

Telegraph/Times says all 100 million by easter. And looking at one jab for younger patients.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

2 hours ago, DeanoL said:

Until I get my vaccine I will. We’ll have had a year of these restrictions, I’ve not caught it yet, I’m not going to go out and risk getting it when I can get vaccinated a few months later. I don’t think that’s particularly crazy. 

Yup

Have you had an antibody test?

[incident]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Telegraph/Times says all 100 million by easter. And looking at one jab for younger patients.

I'm instantly suspicious of any source that suggests a one jab programme is being considered, simply because while politicians might like the idea, there's hardly any hard evidence on the effectiveness, and so I can't see how they get it past the MHRA/JCVI.

Right now nearly all of the published evidence is for 2 shots, and the limited amount of information we do have for 1 shot effectiveness only tells us about the first month.

[DeanoL]

21 minutes ago, zahidf said:

If we had lockdown for 3 months I'd agree. More than a year though? Different story. People are sick of being locked down 

Do you not think there’s an element of sink cost fallacy coming in though? I’ve not seen my friends properly for a year and what do I, personally, have to show for it? Well I haven’t had COVID. That’s like the one tangible benefit people can realise from lockdown. 

So to throw that away for the sake of three months early... I’m not saying it’s the logical move but it’ll be a huge psychological barrier to overcome.

[DeanoL]

3 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Have you had an antibody test?

No. Have barely left the house though.

[zahidf]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Do you not think there’s an element of sink cost fallacy coming in though? I’ve not seen my friends properly for a year and what do I, personally, have to show for it? Well I haven’t had COVID. That’s like the one tangible benefit people can realise from lockdown. 

So to throw that away for the sake of three months early... I’m not saying it’s the logical move but it’ll be a huge psychological barrier to overcome.

An element. But if the death rate is down cos of vaccines, then you've got people worried about it catching it for their own sakes. Hopefully more vaccinated people means less spread as well. 

[zahidf]

7 minutes ago, incident said:

I'm instantly suspicious of any source that suggests a one jab programme is being considered, simply because while politicians might like the idea, there's hardly any hard evidence on the effectiveness, and so I can't see how they get it past the MHRA/JCVI.

Right now nearly all of the published evidence is for 2 shots, and the limited amount of information we do have for 1 shot effectiveness only tells us about the first month.

There is new evidence to the MHRA: maybe it has more on the one shot?

 

Its one shot and the second shot later as well. Not just one shot, but the second shot as late as possible to keep supply high.

[fraybentos1]

The Telegraph article if anyone wants to read it...

 

 

The Oxford vaccine will be rolled out from January 4 across the country under plans being drawn up by ministers, The Telegraph can reveal.

The Government is aiming for two million people to receive their first dose of either the Oxford vaccine or the Pfizer jab within a fortnight as part of a major ramping up of the inoculation programme.

The Telegraph can also disclose that mass vaccination centres at sports stadiums and conference venues are primed to launch in the second week of January, provided the regulator approves the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine within days.

The rollout of the Oxford vaccine, which is easier to store and handle than the Pfizer jab and costs less, is likely to make it easier to reach people living in the most secluded areas of England.

The Government has ordered 100 million jabs, with the majority expected to be rolled out by March next year. Senior Government sources said that approval could come as soon as Sunday after the company submitted its final tranche of data to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) on Monday evening.

Meanwhile, after the first Pfizer vaccine doses were delivered to care homes this week, “roving” health teams have now been tasked with visiting hundreds of additional homes by New Year’s Eve.

It comes after the Department for Health and Social Care admitted on Friday that just seven care homes had been visited by Christmas Eve, while figures suggest residents account for only 0.3 per cent of the 613,000 people inoculated so far.

By the end of the first week of January, the Government is privately aiming to have delivered the first dose of both vaccines to two million people in England, with the numbers due to accelerate as supply increases.

However, Downing Street last night stressed that these were internal ambitions, rather than official targets.

It comes amid growing pressure on ministers to accelerate the rollout of the vaccine in response to surging infection rates across the country, fuelled by the new strain of Covid-19 which is believed to have originated in Kent.

After cases more than doubled this week across England, with hospital admissions eclipsing the peak in April, fears are mounting that a tougher nationwide lockdown will be required unless jabs can be distributed more quickly to the elderly and extremely vulnerable.

“We are deploying as fast as we get the stuff in,” a Whitehall insider said last night. “The constraint is supply, not deployment.

“The protocol around Pfizer is really difficult, but with AstraZeneca it’s much easier, it’s like the flu vaccine.”

Easier to store, handle and more readily available than the Pfizer vaccine, the Government also intends to distribute the Oxford jab to mass vaccination centres, including sports hall, stadiums and conference centres from the second week of January.

The Nightingale hospital at the London ExCel centre, Epsom racecourse in Surrey, Bristol's Ashton Gate football stadium and the Robertson House conference facility in Stevenage will serve the capital and south of England, while Manchester Tennis and Football Centre, the Centre for Life Science Park in Newcastle and Leicester Racecourse are the mass vaccine sites for the North and the Midlands.

The Oxford vaccine is also due to be administered alongside the Pfizer jab at 83 hospital hubs and 400 GPs which are already operational, with a further 200 GPs due to be online by this weekend.

As supplies of the vaccine increase, the Government is also preparing to expand rollout to primary care networks and community pharmacies.

[incident]

Just now, zahidf said:

There is new evidence to the MHRA: maybe it has more on the one shot?

 

Its one shot and the second shot later as well. Not just one shot, but the second shot as late as possible to keep supply high.

We'll see - I'd be surprised if there's any significant evidence on that front, simply because the parameters of the clinical trials have all specified a ~28 day window and so any results that go beyond that will be the odd few cases where someone has missed or delayed their second appointment, and I doubt that'll be more than a small percentage of cases.

Unless there's significant new evidence, then the MHRA approval should be based on that ~28 day window regardless of what any politician would like. It's important for credibility that the MHRA decisions aren't tainted by politics.

[stuartbert two hats]

24 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Do you not think there’s an element of sink cost fallacy coming in though? I’ve not seen my friends properly for a year and what do I, personally, have to show for it? Well I haven’t had COVID. That’s like the one tangible benefit people can realise from lockdown. 

So to throw that away for the sake of three months early... I’m not saying it’s the logical move but it’ll be a huge psychological barrier to overcome.

Yes, but it's not a fallacy in this case.

[Gilgamesh69]

Do we reckon day events will happen sooner than festivals?

 

Was thinking if Glasto doesn't happen, my backup plan might be a long weekend in Glasgow. Guns n Roses on the Thursday, Biffy Clyro on the Friday, and Green Day on the Monday.