Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Todd_is_God]

3 minutes ago, bendan said:

One problem they have is that there are a lot of unanswered questions about all of the vaccines, but the Oxford one in particular. If efficacy is only in the 60-70% range, what are the implications? We also don't seem to know whether the vaccines prevent people from spreading the virus, which seems a pretty crucial bit of information.

If the vaccine is effective at reducing the severity of disease to a relatively mild illness then it makes the bit in bold largely redundant.

[Todd_is_God]

6 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

At the risk of over simplification, it's fairly basic project management to set milestones as numbers vaccinated against restrictions lifted to the end point of normality. Build in some flexibility to allow for vaccine supply of other logistical issues.

I was trying to give them a little bit of slack, as setting hard targets like that (or at least making them public) is something they have completely avoided to date, so I have no expectation they would suddenly start now.

[bendan]

Just now, Todd_is_God said:

If the vaccine is effective at reducing the severity of disease to a relatively mild illness then it makes the bit in bold largely redundant.

It makes the bit in bold redundant once everyone has been offered a vaccination, but in the transitional period it creates a lot of doubt. People who've been vaccinated will relax, which would increase risk for those who haven't.

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

I was trying to give them a little bit of slack, as setting hard targets like that (or at least making them public) is something they have completely avoided to date, so I have no expectation they would suddenly start now.

I know I am over simplifying it, but at each milestone you can have a few variables and you can adjust the next one.

[bendan]

6 minutes ago, Ron Aldo said:

I read that this morning (from an interview with the ASZ boss) but the new data to back that up would need to be properly reviewed before it becomes part of government planning. The balls-up they made of their initial trials hasn't helped their credibility.

[Todd_is_God]

Just now, bendan said:

It makes the bit in bold redundant once everyone has been offered a vaccination, but in the transitional period it creates a lot of doubt. People who've been vaccinated will relax, which would increase risk for those who haven't.

The SG plan on offering a vaccine to everyone deemed at risk due to health conditions, as well as everyone over 50.

To date there have been just 27 deaths of people aged 44 and under. The risk to that group is incredibly small.

Given that there will still be restrictions of some kind in place (almost certainly masks and distancing) until the "at risk" groups have been vaccinated, then if there is a couple of months where people who are not due a vaccine, or have not yet reached their point in the queue, have to decide if they want to take part in an activity they consider "risky" then that becomes their choice.

[bendan]

7 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

The SG plan on offering a vaccine to everyone deemed at risk due to health conditions, as well as everyone over 50.

To date there have been just 27 deaths of people aged 44 and under. The risk to that group is incredibly small.

Given that there will still be restrictions of some kind in place (almost certainly masks and distancing) until the "at risk" groups have been vaccinated, then if there is a couple of months where people who are not due a vaccine, or have not yet reached their point in the queue, have to decide if they want to take part in an activity they consider "risky" then that becomes their choice.

I agree with what you are saying, I just think there are  more variables in play (some of them still unclear) than we might initially think. If vaccines stop transmission that would be a big plus and would help speed up a return to normality, as would a higher efficacy for the Oxford vaccine.

Edited December 27, 2020 by bendan

[Juanhourjoe]

25 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

At the risk of over simplification, it's fairly basic project management to set milestones as numbers vaccinated against restrictions lifted to the end point of normality. Build in some flexibility to allow for vaccine supply of other logistical issues.

I don't think we could realistically have any expectations of real timelines at the moment. Not till we have vaccines going in big numbers.

All I'd hope for right now, is the infrastructure to be well on its way to being prepared.

[Sergeant Wilson]

3 minutes ago, Juanhourjoe said:

I don't think we could realistically have any expectations of real timelines at the moment. Not till we have vaccines going in big numbers.

All I'd hope for right now, is the infrastructure to be well on its way to being prepared.

The principles could be established and infrastructure in place. Day one being delivery of x number of vaccine doses, count from there.

[eez-eh]

2 hours ago, Paco said:

Complaining that we’re ‘a long way’ from keeping restrictions only when necessary when the pandemic is at its highest peak so far is a bit of a bitch fit, yes.

Probably a harsh way of putting it but it doesn’t make it any less true, and it’s on a par with Cormack/Doncaster demanding thousands of fans at all grounds on the day two million went into Level 4 restrictions.

That’s highly disingenuous.

Hospitalisations UK wide are at the level they were back in April, but the number in ICU is only half of what it was then.

In Scotland, total hospitalisations are 2/3 of what they were at the peak, and ICU levels 1/4 of what they were then. Our percentage of tests returning positive is also well down from a couple of months ago.

[Juanhourjoe]

2 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

The principles could be established and infrastructure in place. Day one being delivery of x number of vaccine doses, count from there.

Aye that would be great. But they're still just guessing, when they'll actually receive all these vaccines. And to make any sort of announcement now, would have folk tracking a notional timeline. And cause resentment pretty quickly, when it doesn't turn out to be accurate.

[Billy Jean King]

Are there more Covid patient in UK hospitals in summer 2021 than there ever have been?
Of course not, it hasn't happened yet.....so why the f**k is 2021 essentially being written off already?

I may have missed it but who has said 2021 is a write off too. Presumably a govt minister and in what context ?

All I saw was a piece from Leitch in a personal interview not in a govt capacity where he said we needed patience and mention of inital vaccination of the vulnerable taking until the summer not Christmas 2021. The mass hysteria in here can't surely be based on a line by someone no one listens to anyway (I even posted at the time it was shit) but that can't possibly have triggered the last few hundred posts so I assume someone else has said something else that I've missed ?

FWIW as soon as we have the Oxford vaccine I fully expect a pretty swift rollout that should see restrictions eased by the spring and hopefully removed by the summer (August at latest). I've seen or heard nothing so far to think it isn't achievable. The panic here seems unjust. I would say there can be no real judgement of how this might go until 6 to 8 weeks AFTER the Oxford roll out, until then we do need to be patient.

[Billy Jean King]

4th Jan is the date they’re expecting 2 million doses of the Oxford vaccine to be distributed across the UK.

If that is correct then there is no reason for the restrictions to continue beyond the 3 week window.

Whit ? Restrictions lifted in January that's cloud cuckoo land stuff that no country is talking of in Europe. You need to be at least a tad realistic. Youd be looking at upwards of half a million per week (x 2 doses) to achieve that, get real !

[welshbairn]

Just now, Juanhourjoe said:

Aye that would be great. But they're still just guessing, when they'll actually receive all these vaccines. And to make any sort of announcement now, would have folk tracking a notional timeline. And cause resentment pretty quickly, when it doesn't turn out to be accurate.

And we don't have any real clue what will happen to the infection rate and severity of the virus during the early phases of the roll out.

[Sergeant Wilson]

Just now, Juanhourjoe said:

Aye that would be great. But they're still just guessing, when they'll actually receive all these vaccines. And to make any sort of announcement now, would have folk tracking a notional timeline. And cause resentment pretty quickly, when it doesn't turn out to be accurate.

It might, but it would also be a sign that some sort of forward planning existed. 

[parsforlife]

On Vaccines vs restrictions, I get the impression that there isn’t much intention to change the metrics of the tier system even at a decent(but below herd immunity) levels.   It’s still going to be based on case levels, hospitalisation, ICU and deaths.   Case levels especially should get given more leeway, as they’ll be less likely to go down the chain.   It’s not going to be a case of ‘ well the old are fine now, do what you like’ More ‘ICU levels are low’ we can drop everyone a couple of tiers.   

 

 

[Marshmallo]

Read there that India is expected to be the first country to approve the AstraZeneca vaccine, early next week. 

[Steven W]

4 minutes ago, Juanhourjoe said:

Aye that would be great. But they're still just guessing, when they'll actually receive all these vaccines. And to make any sort of announcement now, would have folk tracking a notional timeline. And cause resentment pretty quickly, when it doesn't turn out to be accurate.

We were given a notional timeline; Jean Freeman "one million vaccinations by the end of January"

That's turned out to be a crock of shit, but after all we've been through some sort of equation along the lines of 'X' amount of vaccinations = the lifting of "Y and Z" restrictions is both not unreasonable, and the least we deserve

[Juanhourjoe]

4 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

And we don't have any real clue what will happen to the infection rate and severity of the virus during the early phases of the roll out.

Also true

 

4 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

It might, but it would also be a sign that some sort of forward planning existed. 

I'd hope that's true. But don't see it being a smart move yet. But a little hope would nice. 

[Wee Bully]

I can't speak for anyone else, but to me it means having a discussion about the level of death from illness and disease that we are willing to accept (and acknowledging that before Covid we were already doing this) and trying to find a sensible balance between continuing our lives and managing health risks. 

Ok - let’s hear it then.

What level of death from illness and disease are you willing to accept?