Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[RiG]

10 minutes ago, eez-eh said:

Caught Radio Scotland in car there. They had someone on whose mother got the vaccine in December but has since contracted the virus. And the presenter is there putting questions to some vaccine bloke asking shite like “well it’s no that effective then is it??!!!”

Everyone should fucking know that it doesn’t stop 100% of people getting the virus, especially when the woman’s only had the one dose. But you’ve got a publicly funded broadcaster fearmomgering and essentially spreading misinformation based on one woman.

What the f**k happened to journalistic standards?

That person is in for a shock when they find out the flu vaccine doesn't stop you getting the flu.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

Everyone agreed though that governments moving forward can never ever be allowed to cut the NHS funding ever again? This has shown that we need massive investment in healthcare, more doctors, more nurses, more research. Healthy population = less crime, less poverty, less days at work missed? Why dont the dickhead tories get it? Absolutely f**k the tories. Anyone who votes tory is a p***k, anyone, zero redeeming factors, vote tory = p***k. 

[madwullie]

Actuary on radio 4 this morning suggesting the models they've run, even with top 4 categories vaccinated (I think he said they assumed 70% protection from spreading it, and 100% protection from serious disease) (top 4 being resposible for 88% of deaths) the figures that would produce in terms of hospitalisations and R would have him really concerned if restrictions were lifted at this point. 

Wish I'd caught the whole thing as unsure if he meant gradual lifting, or a whip everything away and let 'er rip type lifting. 

Will see if I can find a link to it

Edit: it was this programme, not sure if there's a write up / transcript of it

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000rccm

Edited January 20, 2021 by madwullie

[Left Back]

9 minutes ago, Mr Tourette said:

Unless I’ve misunderstood the potential effects of the vaccine, I’m struggling to see why we would ever need any kind of restrictions once all adults have been vaccinated.

Even allowing for the worst case scenario of a frankly crazy figure of 20% choosing not to be vaccinated, future hospitalisation figures would be 80% less than at present, even if infection rates are similar to now. The NHS would be in no danger of being overwhelmed therefore no need for any restrictions at all?

if you then factor in efficacy (lets say it's 70%) then 30% of the 80% would still be at risk so overall 44% at risk which wouldn't achieve herd immunity (Vallance estimated this morning you need 70% either to have been vaccinated or have had the virus)..  No idea if that could overwhelm the NHS.  I suspect it could.  I also didn't factor in the people who have achieved a level of immunity by infection which will take it down from 44%.

Personally I'd doubt 20% will refuse to be vaccinated.

[Dundee Hibernian]

10 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Everyone agreed though that governments moving forward can never ever be allowed to cut the NHS funding ever again? This has shown that we need massive investment in healthcare, more doctors, more nurses, more research. Healthy population = less crime, less poverty, less days at work missed? Why dont the dickhead tories get it? Absolutely f**k the tories. Anyone who votes tory is a p***k, anyone, zero redeeming factors, vote tory = p***k. 

They do get it, but it's simply not part of their project to achieve greater public investment in health improvement. There's no quick money in it for party donors.

[madwullie]

9 minutes ago, Left Back said:

if you then factor in efficacy (lets say it's 70%) then 30% of the 80% would still be at risk so overall 44% at risk which wouldn't achieve herd immunity (Vallance estimated this morning you need 70% either to have been vaccinated or have had the virus)..  No idea if that could overwhelm the NHS.  I suspect it could.  I also didn't factor in the people who have achieved a level of immunity by infection which will take it down from 44%.

Personally I'd doubt 20% will refuse to be vaccinated.

At the risk of generalising, a good wedge of AHM NO TAKIN NO VACCINE punters will change their mind sharpish if they need proof of vaccination to get on a plane to Spain. 

Edited January 20, 2021 by madwullie

[Billy Jean King]

This. Vaccination roll out in the EU will be pretty decent, so by the time we are in a position to allow our population out, they will be in a position to let us in. And vice versa.
In the wider world, poorer countries might be off the menu for a bit longer, but again, being vaccinated (both doses) yourself should offer sufficient protection.
The vaccine resistant strain panic seems a bit of a stretch as it is based firstly on a problem that doesn't actually exist, but also ignores the prospect that previous exposure to other coronaviruses or SARS would likely reduce the severity of infection anyway, and therefore the vaccine would still have a good effect.

Some EU countries have a fairly big chunk of their population vaccine adverse. It might be patchier within the EU than some places outwith.

[Left Back]

9 minutes ago, madwullie said:

At the risk of generalising, a good wedge of AHM NO TAKIN NO VACCINE punters will change their mind sharpish if they need proof of vaccination to get on a plane to Spain. 

If you really wanted to force their hand you could look at putting restrictions on other things if you haven't been vaccinated (large indoor gatherings etc.).  no idea how you could enforce it though.  Not sure if I agree with it morally either.

[Billy Jean King]

Unless I’ve misunderstood the potential effects of the vaccine, I’m struggling to see why we would ever need any kind of restrictions once all adults have been vaccinated.

Even allowing for the worst case scenario of a frankly crazy figure of 20% choosing not to be vaccinated, future hospitalisation figures would be 80% less than at present, even if infection rates are similar to now. The NHS would be in no danger of being overwhelmed therefore no need for any restrictions at all?

I agree but every "boffin" wheeled out seems to be trotting out the "not a magic. bullet" line

I think this is mostly to curb those already vaccinated from breaking ranks. I also think it's partly down to the time it's going to take to get everyone over 18 vaccinated. September is that goal so until then it looks like this will be the mood music. After every adult has been vaccinated then absolutely masking and SD surely has to go. I anticipate it will be just those until that stage.

[The Moonster]

1 hour ago, 101 said:

Because there are people who won't take the vaccine for personal views or religious beliefs. Obviously we all hope that number is as low as possible but some opinion polls have it as high as 20%. That 20% might not be a problem if it's spread right through the UK but if it's concentrated in a particular region then it could still pose a threat to the health care system.

They are round the corner anyway if there is one thing we can be sure of it won't be 100 years until the next pandemic. We have don't nothing to stop the virus entering humans since 2019, wet markets still exists and the market for low cost chicken mean we or the US could be the next epicenter.

See in this world of social distancing forever to protect 20% of people (who are vaccine deniers), how do we procreate?

Edited January 20, 2021 by The Moonster

[101]

2 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

See in this world of social distancing forever to protect 20% of people (who are vaccine deniers), how do we procreate?

I don't think social distancing will last forever and have never said as much. I think the system of contact tracers should remain to stop vaccine refusers having an effect on the rest of us. 

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

5 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

See in this world of social distancing forever to protect 20% of people (who are vaccine deniers), how do we procreate?

Devine miracle?

[Michael W]

58 minutes ago, Left Back said:

Interesting Q&A with Vallance on Sky this morning.  With hindsight reckons they should have locked down harder and faster in March.  He also said he wishes (but he can’t see how anyone can have predicted this was necessary) they’d recommended closing the borders last January.  He reckons by March it was too late and wouldn’t have made any difference.

I have no doubt there are a number of them utterly haunted by their previous comments and positions on this matter. 

The last bit I don't agree with. Even locking down a week before we did would've made a difference as we'd have curbed the spread at least partially. Then you have the likes of letting Rangers play Bayer Leverkusen and Liverpool play Atletico Madrid with 50k fans in attendance at each a week before we locked down. 

[madwullie]

11 minutes ago, Left Back said:

If you really wanted to force their hand you could look at putting restrictions on other things if you haven't been vaccinated (large indoor gatherings etc.).  no idea how you could enforce it though.  Not sure if I agree with it morally either.

I'm not sure how I feel about that either - or how particularly workable it will be with the uncompromising drive for things to be back to normal.

Getting on a plane is different though. If we get everything down to a manageable level and open up a bit fucking right I'd be expecting people coming here to have proof of vaccination, so it stands to reason we should have to show similar if travelling ourselves. 

[madwullie]

10 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

See in this world of social distancing forever to protect 20% of people (who are vaccine deniers), how do we procreate?

Anal only for anti-vaxxers. No kissing. 

[The Moonster]

7 minutes ago, 101 said:

I don't think social distancing will last forever and have never said as much. I think the system of contact tracers should remain to stop vaccine refusers having an effect on the rest of us. 

The system of contact tracing has been excellent right enough, should continue to waste a few more billion on it.

[101]

Just now, The Moonster said:

The system of contact tracing has been excellent right enough, should continue to waste a few more billion on it.

I agree the people of England should be particularly concerned, if you and your English tax payers wish to continue throwing money at call centers then by all means go for it. The Scottish system seems to be somewhat more effective although falls at the final hurdle of people not typing the code into the app.

[Distant Doonhamer]

Anal only for anti-vaxxers. No kissing. 

Rewarding bad behaviour never a good plan [emoji23]

[welshbairn]

21 minutes ago, Left Back said:

If you really wanted to force their hand you could look at putting restrictions on other things if you haven't been vaccinated (large indoor gatherings etc.).  no idea how you could enforce it though.  Not sure if I agree with it morally either.

I think it could be morally justified to protect people who can't take the vaccine for medical reasons. Shouldn't be an issue if we hit herd immunity, except for maybe foreign travel if other countries are lagging behind.

[Todd_is_God]

16 minutes ago, 101 said:

I don't think social distancing will last forever and have never said as much. I think the system of contact tracers should remain to stop vaccine refusers having an effect on the rest of us. 

Even if the contact tracing and isolation only applied to those unvaccinated I can't see how this would work. Unless you are advocating having the police having the power to stop people that are out and check their vaccination & isolation status, in which case there is a special place right at the bottom of a bin in the middle of Pyongyang for this idea.

I'm really not at all concerned about anti-vaxxers tbh. They will be a small percentage, and the risk to me (and anyone else who has been vaccinated) from them is pretty much non-existant.