The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[Tamworthram]

2 hours ago, TexasRam said:

Sounds pretty sensible to me, let’s hope we follow. Not sure our media will be happy with not showing the case numbers though. 

It does but, don’t forget, their rates are tiny. According to Worldometers they haven’t had more than 200 daily cases since last August.

If/when we get down to those sort of numbers (for a prolonged period of time) then I think it would be difficult to justify maintaining any sort of restrictions.

[Gone]

10 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

It does but, don’t forget, their rates are tiny. According to Worldometers they haven’t had more than 200 daily cases since last August.

If/when we get down to those sort of numbers (for a prolonged period of time) then I think it would be difficult to justify maintaining any sort of restrictions.

I don’t know how we justify them now to be honest. What’s the point in a vaccination program if you need to keep restrictions. 

[rammieib]

5 hours ago, BucksRam said:

I think if anyone wants to go away, go - so long as you accept any risk, and stick to the rules applying to wherever you're going, and also when you return.  What annoys me is people going away to countries that are borderline, then moan like hell when the rules change whilst they're away - travel abroad is very much risk based at the moment so you have to accept whatever happens as part of your decision to go.  Not moan if our, or a foreign Government decides you need a test or now need to quarantine. 

On a personal level, we've chosen not to go abroad - our choice, but I don't judge others for doing so.  The only thing I do judge is if they then blatantly ignore guidelines, and put others at risk, but that's more general anyway and not confined to travel abroad.  I've just spent a couple of days working in London - first time in 15 months.  Was weird, but great to see some of my colleagues face to face however, in consideration of my family, and others, I've done a flow test just to make sure I'm still negative, in acknowledgement I had increased my risk of exposure by a commute into London. 

Except they haven't published a clear guideline on what makes a country green, amber or red. They've told us the factors but never broken it down into detail.

That kind of major point aside, I agree with your post.

[BucksRam]

10 minutes ago, rammieib said:

Except they haven't published a clear guideline on what makes a country green, amber or red. They've told us the factors but never broken it down into detail.

That kind of major point aside, I agree with your post.

True - but then that's been the issue with everything to do with COVID - what data makes up the decisions, where that data came from, its timeliness and how is it interpreted and by whom.  One man's truth is another man's perception.  That's the crux of people's arguments with this rather than the ratings themselves in my view. There is an argument to say do we, as public need to understand all the algorithms or should we "just" accept what we're told and do our best to comply. 

What I've taken though is that there is a traffic light rating for countries, readily available: 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/red-amber-and-green-list-rules-for-entering-england  or : https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice. 

Of course the frustration here is that ratings are fluid and I guess if we don't fully understand the rationale behind it all, then it's natural to challenge and argue why we should listen.  

[Tamworthram]

39 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

I don’t know how we justify them now to be honest. What’s the point in a vaccination program if you need to keep restrictions. 

Probably because, whilst good, only something like 57% of the adult population have been fully vaccinated and a lot of those have only had their second jab within the last couple of weeks.

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

It does but, don’t forget, their rates are tiny. According to Worldometers they haven’t had more than 200 daily cases since last August.

If/when we get down to those sort of numbers (for a prolonged period of time) then I think it would be difficult to justify maintaining any sort of restrictions.

We'll be having restrictions until the year 2085.

200 cases a day and we can open up and be safe, is that what you're really thinking? You can't be serious and if you are, you need to change the way in your thinking.

Do you think our average 7 day death rate is too high for a population hitting nearly 70m? 

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

1 hour ago, rammieib said:

Except they haven't published a clear guideline on what makes a country green, amber or red. They've told us the factors but never broken it down into detail.

That kind of major point aside, I agree with your post.

The government won't give you these details because they can't move the goalposts without anybody knowing if they did. 

[rammieib]

1 hour ago, BucksRam said:

True - but then that's been the issue with everything to do with COVID - what data makes up the decisions, where that data came from, its timeliness and how is it interpreted and by whom.  One man's truth is another man's perception.  That's the crux of people's arguments with this rather than the ratings themselves in my view. There is an argument to say do we, as public need to understand all the algorithms or should we "just" accept what we're told and do our best to comply. 

What I've taken though is that there is a traffic light rating for countries, readily available: 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/red-amber-and-green-list-rules-for-entering-england  or : https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice. 

Of course the frustration here is that ratings are fluid and I guess if we don't fully understand the rationale behind it all, then it's natural to challenge and argue why we should listen.  

I think if they had produced a clear guideline such as 100 cases per 100k people then it’s green and so on but there is no real reason why a number of countries are not green, and that’s the confusing thing for me?

[Gone]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

Probably because, whilst good, only something like 57% of the adult population have been fully vaccinated and a lot of those have only had their second jab within the last couple of weeks.

I didn’t realise the whole adult population needed to be protected. Thought the mantra was once the elderly and the vulnerable where protected, it was back to business as usual? Anyway pointless debating against something where the goalposts move at each decision point 

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, Bald Eagle's Barmy Army said:

We'll be having restrictions until the year 2085.

200 cases a day and we can open up and be safe, is that what you're really thinking? You can't be serious and if you are, you need to change the way in your thinking.

Do you think our average 7 day death rate is too high for a population hitting nearly 70m? 

I didn’t say that I thought restrictions should stay in place for any particular length of time, I just meant to point out that less than 200 cases a day v over 10,000 cases a day makes it an easier decision for Singapore.

I’m confident restrictions will be lifted on 21st July but think we’re a long way off making the sort of announcement coming out of Singapore which, is where this little exchange started.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Tamworthram

[cstand]

Double jabbed and still caught covid this is why I remain cautious about a free for all let’s get back to normal attitude. If we are not careful we will be on lockdown again.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57640550

[RoyMac5]

9 minutes ago, cstand said:

Double jabbed and still caught covid this is why I remain cautious about a free for all let’s get back to normal attitude. If we are not careful we will be on lockdown again.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57640550

Caught covid yes, hospitalised no. 

That is the point of the vaccinations. NO vaccination is 100%.

[Norman]

Honestly, if I was PM I would take the very difficult decision (in terms of potential reprucussions) and open up fully right now. 

Singapore may have low numbers now, but its proven that the vaccine doesn't stop the spread of variants. And it never will. You just don't get as ill as you potentially could have. So, obviously they've the got vaccination drive and decided that now is the time to open up, knowing cases will go and other variants will enter their population. 

For me, that is a crucial decision to follow. Now is the time to repair the damage of some earlier decisions and get our economy going first. 

Open it up - get it moving, produce, manufacture, build and create as quickly as possible with minimal amount of restrictions and get ahead of other countries. 

We've got to go for it now in my opinion. 3 weeks will cost a lot more money and stop a lot more opportunities and jobs being created earlier. 

Countries like Australia with low death rates will be in lockdowns for longer. They have zero herd immunity to any strain, and will rely fully on a vaccination drive that's still in first gear. And even then, the vaccine will not stop the spread of those strains. Will be interesting to see death rates in 6 months time. Hopefully having no immunity to a lot of strains won't cause havoc when they inevitably enter the population and spread quickly. 

[cstand]

19 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Caught covid yes, hospitalised no. 

That is the point of the vaccinations. NO vaccination is 100%.

How many people who are doubled jabbed get covid and end up hospitalised is unknown hopefully none but it’s better to be safe than sorry.

I am all for getting back to normal as much as possible but I still think we need to take a cautious approach.

 

Edited June 28, 2021 by cstand

[RoyMac5]

7 minutes ago, cstand said:

How many people who are doubled jabbed get covid and end up hospitalised is unknown hopefully none but it’s better to be safe than sorry.

I am all for getting back to normal as much as possible but I still think we need to take a cautious approach.

By all means you take a cautious approach. But now nothing will keep all of us safe. The vaccine will hopefully lessen the effects for those who catch covid. There have been studies of numbers in hospital and of those who have been double-jabbed. It's a small minority and what is not said is how many of those have underlying health problems.

It isn't going to get much safer for most of us. 

Edited June 28, 2021 by RoyMac5

[sage]

Several things about this Hancock business interest me.

a) the kiss was on May 6th but someone sat on this for 7 weeks. Who and why?

b) who put a cctv camera in a smoke detector?

c) BJ stood by him and then tried to imply he had sacked him after he resigned

d) Within hours of being given the Health job, Sajid Javid was clearly taking a 'back to normal' tone. without having time to consider all the data.

 

Now call me a cynic, but c) and d) makes a) and b) very interesting.  

Edited June 28, 2021 by sage

[Archied]

10 minutes ago, sage said:

Several things about this Hancock business interest me.

a) the kiss was on May 6th but someone sat on this for 7 weeks. Who and why?

b) BJ stood by him and then tried to imply he had sacked him after he resigned

c) Within hours of being given the Health job, Sajid Javid was clearly taking a 'back to normal' tone. without having time to consider all the data.

 

Now call me a cynic, but b) and c) makes a) very interesting.  

So your guess??‍♂️

[sage]

12 minutes ago, Archied said:

So your guess??‍♂️

My guess would be someone in govt or civil service tipped off the Sun. They sat on it until Bojo wanted rid 

The alternative is even more worrying.

[RoyMac5]

Quote

Beeb: 

There is even better news with deaths. Latest estimates show fewer than one in 1,000 infections is leading to a death. At the peak of the winter wave it was one in 60.

This has dramatically altered what can be considered a proportionate response to the virus - and is why a further loosening of restrictions remains on the cards.

[Gaspode]

2 minutes ago, sage said:

My guess would be someone in govt or civil service tipped off the Sun. They sat on it until Bojo wanted rid 

The alternative is even more worrying.

I don’t reckon Boris is capable of installing a camera in a smoke detector - pretty much guaranteed that he’d fall off the table….