Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[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
 

[harry94]

6 minutes ago, Elixir said:

Regarding your first point, no there's not. No variant is going to reduce these vaccines to 'useless' in the short to medium term. The South African 'variant' is one of those which had been causing said concern.

Regarding your second point, that is most likely, I agree. But certainly Europe will be opening up this summer. Whether or not the Scottish or UK Governments want to continue to act like cretins remains to be seen, however.

4 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.

I was wrong to focus on effectiveness. The problem I was trying to articulate isn't really lead from jumping from 9x% to <50% effectiveness, there should be similarities in the spike and the vaccine should still create the desired antigens. The biggest challenge is the dynamics of how the virus behaves in transmission and symptom manifestation could entirely change.

To take an example, children are generally resistant to the worst symptoms of covid and cases warranting hospitalisation for this demographic are relatively uncommon. If a new strain were to increase transmission rates within this demographic and the severity of symptoms (which is completely possible and something we've seen with COVID many times already) which possibly creates a long lasting effect, suddenly the focus of the vaccination programme changes quite a bit with this group low down the list of targets suddenly more vulnerable. The overall effectiveness of your vaccine will drop and that can be tweaked with optimisation but it creates quite a large logistical challenge.

Until we have a good global response and time to see some longish term results regarding the implementation of the vaccine programme, there will be considerable caution over international travel. I think once we hit all demographics by the end of the year, that will ease a little bit but travel will still be fundamentally changed.

 

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

18 minutes ago, Big Fifer said:

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. 

Yep, this is exactly it! No one is saying tell us the exact date, more tell us what level this needs to get to, but also we understand that new factors may come into play, thats certainly all I want. You’re right, obviously we cant be flippant about a virus which has taken lives but we do also need to understand it’s ruining lives too.

[Guest TheJTS98]

2 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

 

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'.

But that's demonstrably not true.

The UK's lockdown restrictions from day one have contained loopholes you could drive a bus through, in the name of jobs, social connection, and mental health. Then there have been the various loosenings over time, which has gone back and forwards.

 

 

[The Stig]

2 minutes ago, TheJTS98 said:

The situation is bad, will be bad for a while

yes they can say that but at the back of that add in "but the vaccines that are proven to work are now available and we should see the numbers in hosital drop soon as more people are being vaccinated and once the NHS is no longer in danger we will ease back on the restrictions in a systematic manner"  it is a simple sentence added in to your negative message that would show that progress is being made and they are at least looking towards the future. 

It gives a little bit of hope without setting targets that can be missed and upsetting the facebook maws  

[Guest TheJTS98]

1 minute ago, The Stig said:

yes they can say that but at the back of that add in "but the vaccines that are proven to work are now available and we should see the numbers in hosital drop soon as more people are being vaccinated and once the NHS is no longer in danger we will ease back on the restrictions in a systematic manner"  it is a simple sentence added in to your negative message that would show that progress is being made and they are at least looking towards the future. 

It gives a little bit of hope without setting targets that can be missed and upsetting the facebook maws  

'How will you measure that the NHS is no longer in danger? Which restrictions will be lifted first?'

[Bairnardo]

This whole debate seems to boil down to people thinking that its acceptable for the government to swallow zero risk in terms of opening up in front of data gathering from the vaccine.

For me, they have to trust it, and begin removing restrictions, slowly at first if need be, in line with hospital limits.

I would contend that this zero risk attitude has never been shown by, or expected of any government before and its fucking bizarre to see it now in the face of these restrictions.

[hk blues]

25 minutes ago, virginton said:

Erm there's no credible border quarantine policy that differentiates between the two either. If you want to close the border to prevent big, bad, new variants getting in then you can't pick and choose which forms of travel are acceptable.

No credible policy you say. So, you acknowledge that such policies do exist - good to hear you confirm you are wrong that such differentiation does exist.

As to your ascertation about their credibility, that's your opinion which is worth the square root of f**k all.

 

 

[No_Problemo]

2 minutes ago, TheJTS98 said:

'How will you measure that the NHS is no longer in danger? Which restrictions will be lifted first?'

1) I imagine by the capacity, along with the numbers of those vaccinated and transmission rates in the community. 

2) Go back into the tier system - simple. 

 

[Guest TheJTS98]

2 minutes ago, No_Problemo said:

1) I imagine by the capacity, along with the numbers of those vaccinated and transmission rates in the community. 

2) Go back into the tier system - simple. 

 

'Ok, so at what capacity will schools and pubs be open, and at what capacity can football grounds reopen?'

 

[Bairnardo]

Just now, No_Problemo said:

1) I imagine by the capacity, along with the numbers of those vaccinated and transmission rates in the community. 

2) Go back into the tier system - simple. 

 

quantifying risk is quit literally an entire industry. Far be it from me to simplify it to the pyramid with cases on the bottom and deaths up the top, but there will be literally thousands of very qualified people looking at this data and doing exactly that. The idea that its difficult to quantify when the hospitals are no longer under threat is fucking mental, and that's before you consider the importance of such analysis in dragging the entire population back to work, school, uni, getting medical treatment, going to the gym or having a job.life at all.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

5 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

This whole debate seems to boil down to people thinking that its acceptable for the government to swallow zero risk in terms of opening up in front of data gathering from the vaccine.

For me, they have to trust it, and begin removing restrictions, slowly at first if need be, in line with hospital limits.

I would contend that this zero risk attitude has never been shown by, or expected of any government before and its fucking bizarre to see it now in the face of these restrictions.

At what point does reducing service provision for psychiatric services for suicidal people when people over the age of 50 are vaccinated with drugs which reduce the overall risk of covid significantly become unjustifiable? 

[DMCs]

33 minutes ago, Big Fifer said:

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. 

 

At the moment the forecast for 75% vaccinated looks like mid July. I can't see how we can be back to reasonably normal before mid August.

Edited January 28, 2021 by DMCs

[Elixir]

Read this full thread.

Why can we not be positive about the fact vaccines are going to crush this virus, again?

[super_carson]

It's not so much that I want a positive message to "feel better" but rather that I want to know that, at some point, we will have our lives back.  Restrictions are all fine and well in the here and now given the situation in hospitals, but there are several vaccines with more on the way and that should dramatically reduce the number of people in hospital/dying.  

I'm not asking NS to come out and give a tangible number of hospitalisations required, to ease restrictions.  I would like them to come out say there will be some point (whatever that might be) whereby the situation regarding the rate of people being hospitalised is such that we can lift restrictions, that we might not know what that looks like at the moment but we are hoping that the vaccine will help with this and that we will get there.  At the moment it is a constant bombardment of fear and emotional messaging which, excuse the hyperbole, is bordering on propaganda with (seemingly given the tone of messages) no end in sight.

What concerns me is that the language is no longer about using hospitalisations and deaths as the barometer in their rhetoric.  It's about transmission and cases all of a sudden, and there seems to be a blinkered approach to covid.  Up until now it has been about protecting the NHS and saving lives - well, if the vaccines do their job (and they surely wouldn't have been approved if they didn't?) then those two things should be taken care of through vaccination.  But the goalposts get shifted again to talking about cases & transmission.  The goalposts can't keep being shifted, there has to be a point at which we learn to live with it.