Coronavirus

[Sith Happens]

3 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

The vaccine isn’t a silver bullet.

I know someone who had the first jab 2 weeks ago and just been informed he has COVID. COVID didn’t wait until he had had the second jab. 

They were saying on the press conference tonight about your protection and its unlikely to offer protection until 14-21 days after.

 

[Abu Derby]

1 minute ago, Sith Happens said:

They were saying on the press conference tonight about your protection and its unlikely to offer protection until 14-21 days after.

 

That certainly seems to have been borne out in this case. 

[Sith Happens]

4 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

That certainly seems to have been borne out in this case. 

I hope they are ok

[rammieib]

17 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

That certainly seems to have been borne out in this case. 

But the vaccines don’t stop you catching it, it’s just the symptoms should be less/none existent.

You could argue that the Gov will use this excuse to keep us in a six month long lockdown especially if cases (with reduced hospitalisation) remain high.

This is my fear.

[rammieib]

1 hour ago, RamNut said:

Well I’m pleased that I’ve wound you up. There aren’t many pleasures left ?

What if they weren’t furloughed and were effectively forced to work and therefore be exposed to a health risk that could put them on sick leave for a significant amount of time or worse. Is that right? Putting their families and partners at risk too? I’m not sure it is.

Correct. But I have been at firms that slashed our wages by 20% or more in a recession. This is a short term measure.

Really? I think caring about people’s health, well-being and the risks that they being exposed to is legitimate. 

Well reports have suggested that lockdown impacts more than none lockdown putting a value on Human life on both.

Plus lockdowns push the issue down the line although granted the silver bullet of vaccines may help this time.

The medium term effects of this lockdown though scare the hell out of me for mental health and employment.

[BIllyD]

50 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

To be fair you would think with the NHS being under such pressure, and there being such urgency to get people vaccinated against Covid, the last thing they would be worrying about is vaccinating you against something that doesnt even appear to exist anymore?

But why doesn't it exist ? By accident ? 

[BIllyD]

54 minutes ago, Archied said:

Seems only right as there’s plenty I’m not allowed to protect myself and my family from these days , still I’m sure we will all be ok if we do as we are told without question or thought?

Well no one is telling you to go and have the jab. Up to you if you decide to take them up on their offer or not, really don't see the issue with them offering you a vaccine to protect you against a virus but fair enough if you do ?

[Tamworthram]

27 minutes ago, rammieib said:

But the vaccines don’t stop you catching it, it’s just the symptoms should be less/none existent.

You could argue that the Gov will use this excuse to keep us in a six month long lockdown especially if cases (with reduced hospitalisation) remain high.

This is my fear.

Genuine question, what makes you think the government are looking for an excuse to impose a six month long lock down? what have they got to gain from it?

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

But why doesn't it exist ? By accident ? 

Not sure as it has existed for every other year that I have been alive. 

[maxjam]

1 hour ago, RamNut said:

It’s not easy. It’s driving everyone crackers including me but it is what it is, and infection rates are increasing.

No its not easy and people will die whatever we do. 

All I tried to do is put forwards the argument that significant numbers of people are suffering, dying and will die as a result of lockdowns - literally millions of children alone around the world according to unicef;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/unicef-warns-lockdown-could-kill-covid-19-model-predicts-12/

Back in March or April or whenever it was I posted a Sky article in this thread calling out 'covidiots' enjoying a sit down in a park with several tower blocks in the background - the chances are that was the only available outdoor space for some of them but the article failed to mention that. 

Lockdowns do not effect everyone equally, some are better able financially or mentally to ride them out than others.  The longer this has dragged on, the less I'm inclined to believe they are justified.

[BIllyD]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

Not sure as it has existed for every other year that I have been alive. 

As has COVID...no wait maybe not. Not that you will believe this and will want an official source but here goes.

Flu has an R rate of 1 compared to 3 for COVID, based upon doing nothing. This year has seen the most flu jabs ever given out, in addition we have had lockdowns, masks and the 20 second rule. Therefore your 1 is quite easy to bring down, given that this has been done globally, international travel has also been virtually non existent flu for the year has for the reason almost gone.
 

Once you start relaxing these rules again you will see it back, no conspiracy, nothing like that, just doesn't get passed on as easy as COVID.

[Archied]

15 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Not sure as it has existed for every other year that I have been alive. 

Maybe COVID will go down as the silver bullet that eradicated flu and pneumonia 

[Archied]

10 minutes ago, maxjam said:

No its not easy and people will die whatever we do. 

All I tried to do is put forwards the argument that significant numbers of people are suffering, dying and will die as a result of lockdowns - literally millions of children alone around the world according to unicef;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/unicef-warns-lockdown-could-kill-covid-19-model-predicts-12/

Back in March or April or whenever it was I posted a Sky article in this thread calling out 'covidiots' enjoying a sit down in a park with several tower blocks in the background - the chances are that was the only available outdoor space for some of them but the article failed to mention that. 

Lockdowns do not effect everyone equally, some are better able financially or mentally to ride them out than others.  The longer this has dragged on, the less I'm inclined to believe they are justified.

Your right and it doesn’t stop at that , there are many ( and I know some personally) for whom this lockdown stuff has made life better for them on balance 

[rammieib]

16 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Genuine question, what makes you think the government are looking for an excuse to impose a six month long lock down? what have they got to gain from it?

I don’t believe they listen to people, I don’t believe they take other factors into consideration.

I don’t see the end game with a vaccine which means people will still catch the virus. People still need to isolate for two weeks if they catch it because they can pass it onto others.

I don’t trust people who have nothing to lose by extending it. Imagine there was an election tomorrow - I bet many MP’s would be taking a different line right now.

We still have millions losing out financially as the support doesn’t reach everyone.

But what’s the end game with this vaccine? I appreciate/agree that it’ll reduce hospital numbers but if it doesn’t reduce cases then what’s the point to it?

We must be allowed to live a normal life if we have taken a vaccine. The government MUST give us statistical parameters they are working against. I.e what must hospital numbers, deaths and cases reduce to in order to reduce the tiers and even abolish the tiers.

Finally - I still find it slightly odd that a vaccine on a one dose, second dose 12 weeks later has been approved where the results have not been publicised yet.

Im not anti vaccine, but I already would prefer the Pfizer one. 
 

However I hate the lockdown and the mental impacts it is having, even on my wife I can see it.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

As has COVID...no wait maybe not. Not that you will believe this and will want an official source but here goes.

Flu has an R rate of 1 compared to 3 for COVID, based upon doing nothing. This year has seen the most flu jabs ever given out, in addition we have had lockdowns, masks and the 20 second rule. Therefore your 1 is quite easy to bring down, given that this has been done globally, international travel has also been virtually non existent flu for the year has for the reason almost gone.

Once you start relaxing these rules again you will see it back, no conspiracy, nothing like that, just doesn't get passed on as easy as COVID.

Which takes us back to the point, why would a completely overwhelmed health service, on the apparent brink of collapse, be wasting time telling people to get the flu vaccine?

[EtoileSportiveDeDerby]

Fed up with this, tier 4 ok, but why ?

I keep an eye on the numbers at least once a week. Derby 264 per 100k not great but lock down back in November, last lockdown, we were getting 450+. Sheffield tier 4 are on 176, higher than Liverpool who moved from T2 to T3. As far as I am aware I have never seen published any rulebook of all the parameters taken into accounts, and what the boundaries are. This in itself would provide clarity and help manage expectations. Now nobody has got a clue of what to expect, we go from freedom at Xmas for 5 days to delayed start for schools and students. When the freedom of information act allows the publication of some of those meetings it should make interesting reading!!

[Tamworthram]

2 minutes ago, rammieib said:

I don’t believe they listen to people, I don’t believe they take other factors into consideration.

I don’t see the end game with a vaccine which means people will still catch the virus. People still need to isolate for two weeks if they catch it because they can pass it onto others.

I don’t trust people who have nothing to lose by extending it. Imagine there was an election tomorrow - I bet many MP’s would be taking a different line right now.

We still have millions losing out financially as the support doesn’t reach everyone.

But what’s the end game with this vaccine? I appreciate/agree that it’ll reduce hospital numbers but if it doesn’t reduce cases then what’s the point to it?

We must be allowed to live a normal life if we have taken a vaccine. The government MUST give us statistical parameters they are working against. I.e what must hospital numbers, deaths and cases reduce to in order to reduce the tiers and even abolish the tiers.

Finally - I still find it slightly odd that a vaccine on a one dose, second dose 12 weeks later has been approved where the results have not been publicised yet.

Im not anti vaccine, but I already would prefer the Pfizer one. 
 

However I hate the lockdown and the mental impacts it is having, even on my wife I can see it.

I get all that and, whilst they might not have anything to lose personally by extending the lock down, I'd be surprised if they don't know people (possibly friends and family) and have some small caring for those that do have something to lose. Also, apart from the obvious, but limited high profile breaches, I'm sure ministers would much welcome a return to freedom for themselves and their families.

I just don't understand what their motivation for a prolonged lock down would be unless they genuinely think it's the right thing to do and, with regard to listening to people, I reckon there are just as many "experts" advocating lock downs as there are against them.

You may be right but I just understand.

 

 

[Tamworthram]

6 minutes ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

Fed up with this, tier 4 ok, but why ?

I keep an eye on the numbers at least once a week. Derby 264 per 100k not great but lock down back in November, last lockdown, we were getting 450+. Sheffield tier 4 are on 176, higher than Liverpool who moved from T2 to T3. As far as I am aware I have never seen published any rulebook of all the parameters taken into accounts, and what the boundaries are. This in itself would provide clarity and help manage expectations. Now nobody has got a clue of what to expect, we go from freedom at Xmas for 5 days to delayed start for schools and students. When the freedom of information act allows the publication of some of those meetings it should make interesting reading!!

Unfortunately, it's not a simple as looking at current rates. These are the measures taken into account:

Coronavirus case numbers across all age groups - particularly among the over 60s

How quickly Covid-19 case rates are rising or falling

The percentage of positive tests in the general population

Pressure on the local NHS – including current and projected NHS capacity based on data around admissions, general/acute/ICU bed occupancy, staff absences

Local context and exceptional circumstances such as a local but contained outbreaks

[Tamworthram]

25 minutes ago, rammieib said:

I don’t believe they listen to people, I don’t believe they take other factors into consideration.

I don’t see the end game with a vaccine which means people will still catch the virus. People still need to isolate for two weeks if they catch it because they can pass it onto others.

I don’t trust people who have nothing to lose by extending it. Imagine there was an election tomorrow - I bet many MP’s would be taking a different line right now.

We still have millions losing out financially as the support doesn’t reach everyone.

But what’s the end game with this vaccine? I appreciate/agree that it’ll reduce hospital numbers but if it doesn’t reduce cases then what’s the point to it?

We must be allowed to live a normal life if we have taken a vaccine. The government MUST give us statistical parameters they are working against. I.e what must hospital numbers, deaths and cases reduce to in order to reduce the tiers and even abolish the tiers.

Finally - I still find it slightly odd that a vaccine on a one dose, second dose 12 weeks later has been approved where the results have not been publicised yet.

Im not anti vaccine, but I already would prefer the Pfizer one. 
 

However I hate the lockdown and the mental impacts it is having, even on my wife I can see it.

Doesn't that kind of imply though that elections could drive wrong behaviours? i.e. taking a particular line, that you may not think is the right,  simply because you think it is popular and will get you elected?

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Unfortunately, it's not a simple as looking at current rates. These are the measures taken into account:

Coronavirus case numbers across all age groups - particularly among the over 60s

How quickly Covid-19 case rates are rising or falling

The percentage of positive tests in the general population

Pressure on the local NHS – including current and projected NHS capacity based on data around admissions, general/acute/ICU bed occupancy, staff absences

Local context and exceptional circumstances such as a local but contained outbreaks

So what are the parameters for the 5 different categories?