Will the 2021 festival go ahead?

[Avalon_Fields]

100% I’ll be perfectly happy go to Glastonbury 2021 if it’s on. My viewpoint may be different to most as I’m older and perhaps have a limited number of Glastonbury’s left so I’m not missing any through choice for sure.

[zahidf]

For sure

 

[DeanoL]

5 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Don’t care about the virus. This a forum, naturally forums attract the more extreme views, that isn’t criticism by the way it’s just how things are. The vast majority of the general public put up with restrictions because they understand the need for them, but once they’re lifted they go about their business even though the virus is still there. If the pubs were opened now restriction free, they’d be rammed. If Glastonbury is on in the summer the overriding majority of the 135k people won’t be giving it a second thought.

Rightly or wrongly the vast majority of the public do not live in fear of Covid, this forum isn’t an accurate reflection of society as a whole. 

Well yeah. The dividing line is generally if you’ve seen some one die or get severely ill from it. Which is a lot more people than you seem to think. Believe me, those who have will not be taking a “ah well, if I get it, I get it” approach.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

20 hours ago, DeanoL said:

Well yeah. The dividing line is generally if you’ve seen some one die or get severely ill from it. Which is a lot more people than you seem to think. Believe me, those who have will not be taking a “ah well, if I get it, I get it” approach.

How do you know what I think? I’m not disputing anything, the numbers are there for everybody to see aren’t they? I’m just talking about the actual reality of a scenario where Glastonbury goes ahead. For it to go ahead there are obviously going to be certain parameters that will need to have been hit for it to go ahead. It’s basic human psychology that we struggle to imagine any other state of mind than the one we’re in. It’s why people make bad decisions when they’re angry, or why you shouldn’t do your weekly food shop when you’re hungry. In the middle of effectively another lockdown in bleak midwinter with cases rising it’s difficult for a lot of people to imagine it, but obviously if Glastonbury goes ahead in 6 months time we’ll be in a completely different place to where we are now. That’s exacerbated by this being a forum and with this particular thread being made up of people with a mostly fearful mindset. If we did a poll on it on this forum you’d get a response far more towards people being worried and Glastonbury possibly being ‘weird’ whereas all the people I know that are going literally would not give Covid a second thought if Glastonbury was on. 

In the real world, 6 months from now IF Glastonbury goes ahead people won’t be walking around scared to go near other people, it’s just not how it will be. There will be a fractional chance of catching it there and a fractional chance of it being serious if you do. Not to mention the fact that the probably 98% of people that attend that don’t go on forums to discuss it live their lives in line with what the restrictions actually are. 

[Gnomicide]

New drug that is given after being exposed to the disease could be available from March/April.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/25/uk-scientists-trial-drug-to-prevent-coronavirus-infection-leading-to-disease?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

[Suprefan]

6 hours ago, Gnomicide said:

New drug that is given after being exposed to the disease could be available from March/April.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/25/uk-scientists-trial-drug-to-prevent-coronavirus-infection-leading-to-disease?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

Regeneron 2.0?

[onthebeach]

Just musing on this ...... so if the vast majority of over 60’s, NHS and most vulnerable have had the vaccination by June where does Covid stand alongside other existing infections that could be contracted in a normal year at the festival and we wouldn’t even think about it? At the moment I’m definitely in the pro lockdown v let it rip camp but there will come a tipping point when hospital admissions/deaths become manageable/acceptable by the majority as cruel as this sounds. I really don’t know what my tipping point will be but there is no way we are going to eradicate it totally. This is going to be such a divisive talking point in months to come 

[Superscally]

On 12/24/2020 at 1:12 PM, DTichborne said:

I do not share Michael's optimism. It needs to be postponed another year. I don't want to be stood in a field when a part-consumed pint comes flying over my head. 

Don't go to Reading then 🤠

[zahidf]

1 hour ago, onthebeach said:

Just musing on this ...... so if the vast majority of over 60’s, NHS and most vulnerable have had the vaccination by June where does Covid stand alongside other existing infections that could be contracted in a normal year at the festival and we wouldn’t even think about it? At the moment I’m definitely in the pro lockdown v let it rip camp but there will come a tipping point when hospital admissions/deaths become manageable/acceptable by the majority as cruel as this sounds. I really don’t know what my tipping point will be but there is no way we are going to eradicate it totally. This is going to be such a divisive talking point in months to come 

By easter I expect most the world to significant open up 

[Ryan1984]

1 hour ago, zahidf said:

By easter I expect most the world to significant open up 

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?

[zahidf]

5 minutes 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?

Depends on the effects of the vaccine and vaccine supply IMO

 

But most politicians want things back ASAP. As here with Poland

Poland is to launch vaccinations on Sunday, FirstNews reported.

The prime minister wrote on Facebook that “everything went according to plan and the first 10,000 doses will be distributed within hours to more than 70 nodal hospitals across Poland.”

“I believe that thanks to the National Vaccination Programme we will gradually reach herd immunity and 2021 will be a year of fast return to normal life in Poland,” Morawiecki wrote.

Edited December 26, 2020 by zahidf

[squirrelarmy]

3 hours ago, Superscally said:

Don't go to Reading then 🤠

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

[kalifire]

On 12/25/2020 at 3:22 AM, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

The vast majority of the general public put up with restrictions because they understand the need for them, but once they’re lifted they go about their business even though the virus is still there. If the pubs were opened now restriction free, they’d be rammed. If Glastonbury is on in the summer the overriding majority of the 135k people won’t be giving it a second thought.

Rightly or wrongly the vast majority of the public do not live in fear of Covid, this forum isn’t an accurate reflection of society as a whole. 

I live somewhere that has suffered harsher restrictions than Tier 4, and for months. When the pubs reopened, they were not rammed. They still aren't, nearing two months since any community transmission. I think you underestimate the care most people have, whether that's for themselves or others.

If Glastonbury 2021 happens, of course it would be full of people not giving it a second thought. That's because those who would, would choose not to attend. That wouldn't make 2021 a 'normal festival', because it would exclude the people who'd normally attend but who choose not to because of COVID. It would be a festival of people who don't care, and that's not Glastonbury.

As for your final point, you'll forgive me if I don't take your word for what "society as a whole" is like.

Edited December 26, 2020 by kalifire

[kalifire]

Doubled up innit.

Edited December 26, 2020 by kalifire

[dentalplan]

6 minutes ago, kalifire said:

I live somewhere that has suffered harsher restrictions than Tier 4, and for months. When the pubs reopened, they were not rammed. They still aren't, nearing two months since any community transmission. I think you underestimate the care most people have, whether that's for themselves or others.

If Glastonbury 2021 happens, of course it would be full of people not giving it a second thought. That's because those who would, would choose not to attend. That wouldn't make 2021 a 'normal festival', because it would exclude the people who'd normally attend but who choose not to because of COVID. It would be a festival of people who don't care, and that's not Glastonbury.

As for your final point, you'll forgive me if I don't take your word for what "society as a whole" is like.

That's just pubs though. It's not an experience like going to experience live music, sports, arts, etc. where those folk who go can't really replicate it in the same way sat at home.

I don't think that the virus would have to be 100% gone for people to be encouraged to support the industries they love and do the things they love. Wouldn't be something that people should be ashamed about or told that they don't care for the welfare of others for doing it.

[zahidf]

19 minutes ago, kalifire said:

I live somewhere that has suffered harsher restrictions than Tier 4, and for months. When the pubs reopened, they were not rammed. They still aren't, nearing two months since any community transmission. I think you underestimate the care most people have, whether that's for themselves or others.

If Glastonbury 2021 happens, of course it would be full of people not giving it a second thought. That's because those who would, would choose not to attend. That wouldn't make 2021 a 'normal festival', because it would exclude the people who'd normally attend but who choose not to because of COVID. It would be a festival of people who don't care, and that's not Glastonbury.

As for your final point, you'll forgive me if I don't take your word for what "society as a whole" is like.

If glastonbury is allowed, then the virus is under control through vaccination. Then people are completely entitled to get on with their lives. Doesnt mean they 'don't care'.

[kalifire]

  

10 minutes ago, zahidf said:

If glastonbury is allowed, then the virus is under control through vaccination. Then people are completely entitled to get on with their lives. Doesnt mean they 'don't care'.

That's an extremely unlikely assumption. Given the state of this government, they'd allow risky events if it meant good optics. I'd argue that anyone who attends mass events in spite of health advice (somewhat different from government), doesn't actually care. Yes they're "entitled" to "get on with their lives", but if that means a super spreader event, it's reasonable to call them careless, at best.

[kalifire]

24 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

I don't think that the virus would have to be 100% gone for people to be encouraged to support the industries they love and do the things they love. Wouldn't be something that people should be ashamed about or told that they don't care for the welfare of others for doing it.

It's cold hard science, really. If the public have been warned that attending a mass event would be detrimental to wider community health, then yes it's reasonable to say they don't care by attending, regardless of what they love doing.

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, kalifire said:

  

That's an extremely unlikely assumption. Given the state of this government, they'd allow risky events if it meant good optics. I'd argue that anyone who attends mass events in spite of health advice (somewhat different from government), doesn't actually care. Yes they're "entitled" to "get on with their lives", but if that means a super spreader event, it's reasonable to call them careless, at best.

It isn't America. Its a risk assessment. If Glastonbury goes ahead, the risks are going to have to be a lot lower than the risks for a mass event now. 

[kalifire]

Just now, zahidf said:

It isn't America

Yes it is. Except for the countries who have been brave enough to make ballsy restrictive decisions, we are all America at this point.

[zahidf]

Some food for thought

- on December 20th, 521,594 people had received their first jab
- 366,715 of those were over 80
- So 70%
- the number vaccinated now stands at over 800k - so assuming the proportion holds, 560k over 80s
- There are 3.2 million over 80s in the UK
- They made up 54% of the death toll of COVID
- for 17.5% of the over 80s have received their first shot
- Estimates for the protection from the first shot range from 50-70%

So if the efficacy is 50% I make it that would mean a 4.7% drop in the fatality rate. Already.

6.6% if it is 70% effective on the first shot.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

7 minutes ago, kalifire said:

It's cold hard science, really. If the public have been warned that attending a mass event would be detrimental to wider community health, then yes it's reasonable to say they don't care by attending, regardless of what they love doing.

Where would you personally draw the line then? So going to Glastonbury would be detrimental to wider public health and irresponsible, but would it be ok to go to a packed London bar instead? Would it be ok to go to church? To a football match? Royal Ascot? A wedding? Would Glastonbury be a a greater risk to public health in isolation compared to say, every pub and restaurant open 7 days a week 365 days per year?

[kalifire]

5 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Where would you personally draw the line then?

At what the health experts have to say. I can't envisage any of them saying that a maskless 200k event will be OK in June 2021.

Edited December 26, 2020 by kalifire

[incident]

3 minutes ago, kalifire said:

It's cold hard science, really. If the public have been warned that attending a mass event would be detrimental to wider community health, then yes it's reasonable to say they don't care by attending, regardless of what they love doing.

It always has been and always will be the case that "attending a mass event would be detrimental to wider community health" to various degrees. That's not a new thing and won't ever go away and so isn't a relevant test. If we judged everything purely from that perspective then the cold hard science, as you put it, is that Glastonbury and other festivals should never exist as inevitably someone will pick up a potentially fatal illness just about ever year, and may well pass that on further to someone more vulnerable.

But obviously that's not the measure we use, and so an insistence on near Zero risk from COVID isn't reasonable or workable when we don't insist or even consider that when it comes to other illnesses. A few years ago the experts were saying that Measles was spreading widely at Festivals but I don't think anyone even contemplated cancelling any.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

7 minutes ago, kalifire said:

At what the health experts have to say. I can't envisage any of them saying that a maskless 200k event will be OK in June 2021.

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