Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Guest TheJTS98]

2 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

Setting out the objectives to meet which will lead to relaxation of restrictions is treating people like adults and being honest with them.

We are told that lockdown is in place to prevent infections and deaths, and take the pressure off the NHS. All reasonable.

So, once all over 50's are vaccinated which we were told would stop 99% of deaths, once the new daily infection rate is back below eg. 100 (which will come by end of March) once the hospitals are no longer overwhelmed (the pressure is beginning to ease) then that should be the time to relax lockdown according to their own measures last year.

Why cant/won't they reconfirm this? Has it changed?

The message from Sturgeons press conference was disgraceful frankly. Abandon all hope for 2021.

I think the point is that they don't know about the underlined section. No country really does.

[Dons_1988]

2 minutes ago, TheJTS98 said:

Nobody is happy about it. And people on this thread should stop throwing that phrase about.

I'm on my third lockdown. For the first two we weren't even allowed to go outside to exercise. Visitors haven't been allowed for more or less the last year. I cannot leave the city I live in, and have been unable to for most of that time.

Stop throwing about 'happy' just because someone disagrees with you on government messaging. It's stupid.

I'm sorry you're struggling with it. I really am. However, I completely disagree that the government should sugar-coat their messaging when doing so would carry a high possibility of having to disappoint everybody a few weeks or months down the line.

I wouldn't be happy if my boss told me to expect a big bonus then told me a few weeks later that I wasn't getting it after I'd already mentally spent the money. Some people on this thread seem to want the government to behave like that. It would be utterly irresponsible.

In fairness, you're accusing him of throwing about being happy about it, but you're fairly throwing about that people want the government to come out and give unrealistic promises.

I don't see many people saying that.

[vikingTON]

5 minutes ago, harry94 said:

There is a distinct possibility that there will be variants that are considerably less effective or not effective at all.

Based on what evidence exactly? This isn't fucking Pokémon, a 'mutation' doesn't change a virus into an entirely unrecognisable form.

[Bairnardo]

Just now, Dons_1988 said:

In fairness, you're accusing him of throwing about being happy about it, but you're fairly throwing about that people want the government to come out and give unrealistic promises.

I don't see many people saying that.

Correct. Having them come out and acknowledge what the end game is, isn't the same as demanding to know whether there will be fans at the cup final.

[Guest TheJTS98]

2 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

In fairness, you're accusing him of throwing about being happy about it, but you're fairly throwing about that people want the government to come out and give unrealistic promises.

I don't see many people saying that.

I think people are. Look back over the last few pages and you'll see people suggesting the government should be putting out a positive message to make people feel better.

I don't see how anyone can perceive that a different way. They're asking for the government to give us good news they don't have.

[Big Fifer]

The "the government can't promise things" brigade should also realise, I don't think many are asking for "Is it to be May? Is it June pubs are open?! etc", it's more "What % of folk vaccinated/% capacity ICU are we looking at to loosen things and get to normality/accepting Covid exists".

The former is indeed a harder thing for the government's to answer, the latter (if we're talking just domestic restrictions rather than travel) is a very reasonable thing to ask the government to do, considering everyone's lives have been ruined for almost an entire year. 

[Detournement]

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

Based on what evidence exactly? This isn't fucking Pokémon, a 'mutation' doesn't change a virus into an entirely unrecognisable form.

It obviously does which is why the flu virus doesn't work for every mutation.

[vikingTON]

16 minutes ago, Elixir said:

bUt ThE vAcCiNeS wOn'T wOrK aGaInSt tHe NeW vArIaNts

And what's worth bearing in mind is that antibodies are only the short-term response. T-cell immunity is not accounted for in lab studies but gives an extra layer of defence in almost all healthy individuals. 

The human immune system does not just down tools because a virus has slightly changed its structure, or else we wouldn't still be living on the planet.

Edited January 28, 2021 by vikingTON

[Dons_1988]

Just now, TheJTS98 said:

I think people are. Look back over the last few pages and you'll see people suggesting the government should be putting out a positive message to make people feel better.

I don't see how anyone can perceive that a different way. They're asking for the government to give us good news they don't have.

I think the challenge is more the combination of a) no clarity of what we're even aiming for here and b) because of that being ultra negative to 'manage expectations'.

That is different to people wanting a baseless positive message.

[Jambomo]

4 minutes ago, virginton said:

Utter pish. We know that the vaccines work from the trial data, we know that it works from the mass, real-time data that Israel is churning out as part of its early access deal and we know that it works from the already falling rates of cases and hospital admission in over 80s. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the vaccination works and that it prevents people from becoming 'very sick'. The only question is where exactly in the >95% effectiveness bracket it will end up. 

We tolerate a far lower benchmark for flu vaccines every year, while rolling them out and not placing a stack of restrictions on everyday life for months 'just in case'. 

As said before they basically said on the briefing last night that whilst the indications are very good, they don’t know that they will work for certain until people are vaccinated and exposed to the virus. There is still some doubts and so I am probably going to believe what the advisors are saying on this one.

[Guest TheJTS98]

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

I think the challenge is more the combination of a) no clarity of what we're even aiming for here and b) because of that being ultra negative to 'manage expectations'.

That is different to people wanting a baseless positive message.

I think governments don't know what they're aiming for, but I think they're (understandably) shy about saying that in public.

As I said a few posts back, I don't really see what the people complaining here would like the government to say. There's very little that would be perceived as positive that wouldn't come with a reasonable chance of having to be walked back in a few weeks or months, at which point the government's words would be used against them and people would feel like the rug had been pulled from under them.

I just can't see what people want them to say to make people feel better.

[Burnieman]

4 minutes ago, TheJTS98 said:

I think the point is that they don't know about the underlined section. No country really does.

They may not know the dates because of course, nobody does (although I'm sure they have an idea), all I am saying is tell people the triggers/targets that need to be met.

They know  - or damn well should know - what these are to allow easing of restrictions.

I'm  sure most people understand that with a combination of vaccines/treatments and better weather, we could/should be back to where we were last summer, but with much less risk of new waves.  So on that basis, will they still have restrictions, quarantine and travel bans? because there is abolutely no justification for it but Sturgeons mood music yesterday wasn't very promising.

We need clarity. Much more clarity. There is no reason not to provide it.

[vikingTON]

Just now, Detournement said:

It obviously does which is why the flu virus doesn't work for every mutation.

Erm no champ, because 'flu' is actually a category for multiple virus types in humans, as well as those that jump between pigs, birds etc. as well. Seasonal flu types therefore have to be predicted based on what happens in the Southern Hemisphere winter. That's the level of complexity that you get from having thousands of years to work through the environment without any treatment. 

Covid-19 has had, erm, 14 months at a push. The two are not even remotely equivalent then. 

[Dons_1988]

Just now, TheJTS98 said:

I think governments don't know what they're aiming for, but I think they're (understandably) shy about saying that in public.

As I said a few posts back, I don't really see what the people complaining here would like the government to say. There's very little that would be perceived as positive that wouldn't come with a reasonable chance of having to be walked back in a few weeks or months, at which point the government's words would be used against them and people would feel like the rug had been pulled from under them.

I just can't see what people want them to say to make people feel better.

Personally? More of a recognition that society has lent them the power to restrict our lives in the way they are doing, and that once the immediate priority of the NHS not collapsing has been satisfied that they will be relinquishing it as soon as is possible.

The tone is far too much 'we'll let you out your homes when we're good and ready'.

[vikingTON]

4 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

As said before they basically said on the briefing last night that whilst the indications are very good, they don’t know that they will work for certain until people are vaccinated and exposed to the virus. There is still some doubts and so I am probably going to believe what the advisors are saying on this one.

Are the people in Israel not being vaccinated and exposed to the virus? 

This is what's known as 'utter pish' to scare people into staying in their boxes during a continued lockdown. The advisors are as complicit in this public messaging as the politicians. The fact that vaccination has ticked every single box expected of it is not actually in doubt though.

[Guest TheJTS98]

2 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

They may not know the dates because of course, nobody does (although I'm sure they have an idea), all I am saying is tell people the triggers/targets that need to be met.

They know  - or damn well should know - what these are to allow easing of restrictions.

I'm  sure most people understand that with a combination of vaccines/treatments and better weather, we could/should be back to where we were last summer, but with much less risk of new waves.  So on that basis, will they still have restrictions, quarantine and travel bans? because there is abolutely no justification for it but Sturgeons mood music yesterday wasn't very promising.

We need clarity. Much more clarity. There is no reason not to provide it.

They're not providing it because they don't have it.

The vaccine timetable could change due to unforeseen problems. The length of time the vaccine gives protection for is unknown at the moment and we don't know if the efficacy will be wearing off in some before we get to younger people. We don't know the difference in the effect of lockdown as compared to the effect of vaccinations on any fall in reported cases etc.

It's frustrating and it goes against our instincts that tell us someone clever somewhere must know all this stuff. But it's just not the case.

[Guest TheJTS98]

3 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Personally? More of a recognition that society has lent them the power to restrict our lives in the way they are doing, and that once the immediate priority of the NHS not collapsing has been satisfied that they will be relinquishing it as soon as is possible.

The tone is far too much 'we'll let you out your homes when we're good and ready'.

I don't see why anyone would assume that the government would want to continue with these restrictions for longer than necessary.

What could possibly be in it for them?

For now, the messaging should be clear. The situation is bad, will be bad for a while, and that should be made clear.

[Bairnardo]

1 minute ago, TheJTS98 said:

They're not providing it because they don't have it.

The vaccine timetable could change due to unforeseen problems. The length of time the vaccine gives protection for is unknown at the moment and we don't know if the efficacy will be wearing off in some before we get to younger people. We don't know the difference in the effect of lockdown as compared to the effect of vaccinations on any fall in reported cases etc.

It's frustrating and it goes against our instincts that tell us someone clever somewhere must know all this stuff. But it's just not the case.

And back we come to whether or not anyone has the right to not catch or become ill of this virus at the expense of everyone else lives. The objective of any of these measures should only be to prevent a tidal wave hitting the NHS. As long as that measurable variable is within manageable levels, normality should be returned to us. Those at risk have been afforded time to get a vaccine, which they will have been given. At that point, people die from things. Most of which they aren't offered 95% protection from.

The way discourse over covid has gone, the above will probably seen as crass and uncaring,. What it actually is, is reality in the case of every other potential cause of death, except covid which has been bogeymanned to such an extent that we are incapable of dragging it back into any semblance of reality

[Guest Bob Mahelp]

1 minute ago, TheJTS98 said:

I don't see why anyone would assume that the government would want to continue with these restrictions for longer than necessary.

What could possibly be in it for them?

For now, the messaging should be clear. The situation is bad, will be bad for a while, and that should be made clear.

I think it was a fellow Dandy a week or so back who posted the truth....that effectively, at this moment, we're being governed by scientists. 

As he explained it, the scientists have been given the problem 'how do we solve the covid-19 issue ?', and being scientists, the answer is 'no contact with others, at all, until it's gone'. 

It's not their job to think about mental health, cancer operations being cancelled, not seeing your parents for 2 years, teenage futures being destroyed or the economy being ground to dust. It's their job to say 'stay at home. No contact with anyone. Nothing. Nobody. Forever, until it's gone'.

We'll only get some sense of normality back at the point where politicians start taking qualified decisions. 

 

[Jambomo]

4 minutes ago, virginton said:

Are the people in Israel not being vaccinated and exposed to the virus? 

This is what's known as 'utter pish' to scare people into staying in their boxes during a continued lockdown. The advisors are as complicit in this public messaging as the politicians. The fact that vaccination has ticked every single box expected of it is not actually in doubt though.

Yes but even Israel have said it’s in the preliminary stages and needs more research and peer-review to verify those numbers. This was quite helpful 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/25/world/middleeast/israels-vaccine-data.html