Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:
7 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:
No. I think the number is shite.

We are not going back to this argument. You sound like DRoss !

We should.

Freeman said 1m.

You don't get to set a target. Half it. Then proclaim to be on target because you look like achieving that. Especially when the resources to hit 1m were available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While these elimination fantasists continue to get airtime, the BBC are also giving updates such as:

Quote
Posted at 9:17

Covid could continue to spread for decades - scientist

Coronavirus will continue to spread "probably for decades to come", a scientist says.

Paul Hunter is a professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia, where researchers have modelled the effectiveness of the UK immunisation programme, taking into account the new, more transmissible variant.

He tells BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Essentially we found that it’s going to be pretty much impossible to get to a level that we have herd immunity either with the vaccination or indeed with natural infection because of the chance that people will have second infections after their first one."

Herd immunity is when a large enough proportion of the population is immune to a disease that it provides indirect protection to others who are not, limiting its spread.

Prof Hunter says there is "no doubt" the vaccination programme will make "a huge difference" and help life get back towards normal.

“We do know that the vaccines are very good at stopping people getting severe illness and dying but don’t really know how well the vaccines work to stop the spread of infection," he says, adding that this means there will continue to be a risk to people who have not had the jab.

 

Edited by Elixir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

We should.

Freeman said 1m.

You don't get to set a target. Half it. Then proclaim to be on target because you look like achieving that. Especially when the resources to hit 1m were available.

The number of doses required to hit a million weren't available 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, renton said:

The number of doses required to hit a million weren't available 

Then the minister responsible for the vaccination program shouldn't have pledged one million by the end of this month then. And should promptly resign for making of arse of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The number of doses required to hit a million weren't available 
He's been told all this umpteen times including the "Freeman million" never being a target, pretty sure someone even posted her transcript. The target is groups 1-5 by the beginning of March always has been but he like Ross and the Tories wants to make ita politicalfootball. One can only assume that is for SNPbaaad reasons.

I see even VT is now accepting it wasn't a target now calling it a pledge which was nearer the mark and tes she should never have said that but the amount of rowing back from the initial euphoria of the vaccine approvals is palpable now right to the top.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, renton said:

The number of doses required to hit a million weren't available 

But they were.

The SG's very own document shows a total of over 1.2m doses (+5% / 60k that are estimated to be wasted) were going to be available by the end of January.

I have no issue with people supporting the SG's strategy, that's their prerogative, so long as they acknowledge that the SG are actively choosing to throttle the delivery of the vaccines, and go slower than is possible.

Screenshot_20210113-210028_Dropbox.jpg

Edited by Todd_is_God
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

Then the minister responsible for the vaccination program shouldn't have pledged one million by the end of this month then. And should promptly resign for making of arse of it.

Its not an invalid point, though it would surely reckon on the veracity of their information she herself received on vaccine delivery, no?

As a seperate practical concern then, any plan should be judged against what is physically achievable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

He's been told all this umpteen times including the "Freeman million" never being a target, pretty sure someone even posted her transcript. The target is groups 1-5 by the beginning of March always has been but he like Ross and the Tories wants to make ita politicalfootball. One can only assume that is for SNPbaaad reasons.
 

Freeman stated one million to be vaccinated by the end of January on Radio Scotland. There may be extenuating circumstances, but she quite clearly shouldn’t have said this. 

Edited by No_Problemo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get why you can't just lift all restrictions after all "vulnerable" groups have been vaccination.  If you are getting 1500 cases a day in lockdown, without any vaccination, and 10% (just picked this figure out my arse for comparisons sake) require hospitalisation then you aren't going to be in a better position, NHS-wise, if you remove all restrictions and let the virus spread throughout the unvaccinated "non-vulnerable" population where you could see 15000 cases a day of which 1% required hospitalisation.

What surely should be getting done is modelling to determine the maximum restrictions that can be binned whilst keeping the hospitalisation rate at a level the NHS can manage.  There has been no information like this made available to the public, only articles like the BBC one above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they were.
The SG's very own document shows a total of over 1.2m doses (+5% / 60k that are estimated to be wasted) were going to be available by the end of January.
I have no issue with people supporting the SG's strategy, that's their prerogative, so long as they acknowledge that the SG are actively choosing to throttle the delivery of the vaccines, and go slower than is possible.
Screenshot_20210113-210028_Dropbox.thumb.jpg.6f2409c318de9a55ddbcb4d1e1e68631.jpg
"Were going to be available "

Exactly the SG were lead to believe that was the case but so far that hasn't materialised. No one seems to know exactly why and it was confirmed again yesterday there is no "stock pile" we are distributing as it comes.

Areas within England have the exact same complaints, they are not getting supplies expected either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

"Were going to be available "

This document is 9 days old.

2 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

Exactly the SG were lead to believe that was the case but so far that hasn't materialised. No one seems to know exactly why and it was confirmed again yesterday there is no "stock pile" we are distributing as it comes.

Oh ok. They definitely wouldn't lie about that, of course.

It's absolutely incredible the lengths people are willing to go to to avoid admitting that the SG have been a wee bit shite at preparing for this roll out. It's always someone else's fault.

Edited by Todd_is_God
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aladdin said:

I get why you can't just lift all restrictions after all "vulnerable" groups have been vaccination.  If you are getting 1500 cases a day in lockdown, without any vaccination, and 10% (just picked this figure out my arse for comparisons sake) require hospitalisation then you aren't going to be in a better position, NHS-wise, if you remove all restrictions and let the virus spread throughout the unvaccinated "non-vulnerable" population where you could see 15000 cases a day of which 1% required hospitalisation.

What surely should be getting done is modelling to determine the maximum restrictions that can be binned whilst keeping the hospitalisation rate at a level the NHS can manage.  There has been no information like this made available to the public, only articles like the BBC one above.

Once the pressure has been eased on the NHS I’m sure there will be a discussion around the fabled herd immunity.  Based on projections on how many un-vaccinated people would be estimated to require hospitalisation there’s an economic/mental health etc. argument that you open up and let it rip.

the flip side to this is that you’re knowingly condemning x number of people to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I was promised 500 toilet rolls by a company in China, only 100 arrived. (true story) It was all my fault obviously.

Were you personally responsible for procuring toilet roll supply and grandly announced to your company's CEO and all customers that yes, all 500 toilet rolls would be received, only to backpedal furiously and blame everyone else? If so, then you were incompetent at your task and incompetence in a key public ministry merits the sack. 

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Billy Jean King said:

"Were going to be available "

Exactly the SG were lead to believe that was the case but so far that hasn't materialised. No one seems to know exactly why and it was confirmed again yesterday there is no "stock pile" we are distributing as it comes.

Areas within England have the exact same complaints, they are not getting supplies expected either.

If the Scottish Government have made predictions based on numbers they have got wrong, heads need to roll up here.  If their numbers and planning have been based on information provided by Westminster which have then subsequently been changed, then the focus shifts south of the border.

Again, this is information that doesnt seem to be getting made public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh ok. They definitely wouldn't lie about that, of course.
It's absolutely incredible the lengths people are willing to go to to avoid admitting that the SG have been a wee bit shite at preparing for this roll out. It's always someone else's fault.
So you are right and everyone else is telling porkies. OK fair enough
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...