Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The issue with publishing the figures on vaccines is that there is considerable controversy about the contracts and supply.  The UKG, reasonably enough, think keeping that information secret is best, I think they are right here.  Especially as the EU has now introduced unilateral controls on the export of vaccines to Northern Ireland, under the Brexit agreement.  This has been condemned by Northern Irish politicians and the UK government have said they are monitoring and considering next steps.  It's a really worrying development but I'm not sure if we know exactly how this will affect vaccine supply to the UK.

As a lawyer I follow on twitter suggested, if you are getting access to public money, the contract should be in the public domain. In all cases. 

Edited by madwullie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, renton said:

Was this part of a breakdown of R by all sources or was it just the school stuff? 

I guess the thing is that a tier system won't work if you then open up anything greater than an additive effect of R = 0.15 given the current median R, right? So even if you keep the schools shut, if opening non essential retail and restaurants and cafes generates an additive R effect near or greater than schools, then the thing will be fucked anyway.

Which would mean we would need to drive R down to 0.6 (ish) before you could start to think about having the budget for opening up.

 

Well no, because you can still open up many other things that do not have the huge additive effect of schools alone and still achieve a steady downtick in cases.

The simple and unavoidable reality is that community transmission + schools open is not compatible with reducing case numbers. Just because lots of people want it to be the top priority does not mean that the numbers magically change on this. Where there is no significant community transmission in the likes of Orkney and most of the Highlands then schools can open soon, but slapping a nationwide blanket policy would be yet another act of idiocy. And if they reopen on that basis in the medium term then it would condemn the vast majority of Scotland to weeks of ruinous and utterly needless restrictions.

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, craigkillie said:


Level 0 was specifically described as being the maximum relaxation without an effective vaccine. We now have an effective vaccine, so any roadmap should include a path towards even more relaxed restrictions, a Level -1 if you will.

This is incorrect. As I mentioned at the time, Level 0 is the maximum relaxation planned for period.

The SG's roadmap to live with the virus assumed that vaccines would be available soon and would help allow for Level 0.

This is why NS constantly says they are the key to "greater domestic normality" - it's also why I don't believe this choice of language is simply to gain greater compliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ec proposals about export controls regarding vaccine is simply that. A proposal.
If it comes to pass it will need legislation passed and will take a couple of weeks at least.
Even then it just means they have 24 hours to find a reasonable reason to block the shipment.
Politically the EC potentially blocking free trade to Northern Ireland is more of a conundrum.
There is a clause but was never expected to be used so early in the agreement, if ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

This is incorrect. As I mentioned at the time, Level 0 is the maximum relaxation planned for period.

The SG's roadmap to live with the virus assumed that vaccines would be available soon and would help allow for Level 0.

This is why NS constantly says they are the key to "greater domestic normality" - it's also why I don't believe this choice of language is simply to gain greater compliance.

Back in the day level 0 was the maximum relaxation without an effective vaccine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, virginton said:

Well no, because you can still open up many other things that do not have the huge additive effect of schools alone and still achieve a steady downtick in cases.

The simple and unavoidable reality is that community transmission + schools open is not compatible with reducing case numbers. Just because lots of people want it to be the top priority does not mean that the numbers magically change on this. Schools can open in the likes of Orkney and most of the Highlands soon but slapping a nationwide blanket policy would be yet another act of idiocy. And if they reopen on that basis anytime soon then it would condemn the vast majority of Scotland to weeks of ruinous and needless restrictions.

Which is why I asked whether the information regarding Schools was part of a wider effort to disaggregate additive effects from different sources. 

Schools contribute 0.2, ok so what does retail contribute? Hospitality? Indoor socialising? If they are all only 0.05, then great. If not, the tier system will flounder on the current nation wide R value, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Not sure what the best thing to do is if the transmission rate inside schools is lower than the transmission rate in the surrounding area.

The only way that the transmission rate could feasibly be higher in schools would be if it was a boarding school. Because co-habiting a living space is the main driver of all transmissions rather than that guy not giving you your precious two metres!!11!! magical force field walking down the street. By the same token then, we should open up all the pubs because the transmission rate is much, much lower in that setting than the surrounding area as well. 

Another utterly ridiculous factoid thrown out there to fool the gullible into believing 'schools are safe'!!!111!!!'

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, renton said:

Which is why I asked whether the information regarding Schools was part of a wider effort to disaggregate additive effects from different sources. 

Schools contribute 0.2, ok so what does retail contribute? Hospitality? Indoor socialising? If they are all only 0.05, then great. If not, the tier system will flounder on the current nation wide R value, right?

The real R rate is in all likelihood closer to 0.8 or even 0.75 if we're lucky. But then Swinney's cherrypicked figure is also at the lowest possible end of the spectrum to Get The Weans Back (and pressure off him losing his job), so you're right back to square one with that.

You could, on the other hand, run a coach and horses through the number of sectors that could safely reopen and the infection rate reaching that of reopening schools alone. Which has been screamingly obvious since July/August to those who retained any understanding of how infectious airborne diseases fire around the country every single winter.

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, welshbairn said:

 Possibly. What should happen if it's found that the transmission rate is lower inside schools than in the wider community?

What are you rambling about? If schools alone are contributing 0.2 to the R rate, that is significant.

I would be interested to know if you would support any other sector remaining open at such a contributory level.

Should hospitality be allowed to open if they are thought to contribute 0.2 to the R rate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schools will drive infection rates more than eg gyms or pubs but I think the societal and economic benefit of schools means they should be the first thing to open/last thing to close.

The sole aim is not and should not be to drive case numbers as low as possible. Multiple factors need to be considered. 

My bugbear with the schools stuff has been the blatant lies about 1) their role in driving infections and 2) some parents acting holier than thou about kids being left behind as their sole care, rather than wanting a breather and not wanting the wee man roaring in the background of a conference call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

 Possibly. What should happen if it's found that the transmission rate is lower inside schools than in the wider community?

Everybody should go to school, obviously.

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...