Generic Virus Thread

[AVFCDAN]

40 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Assuming the deaths keep reducing in a linear fashion (they seem to be) then we should be down to very few in the first week in March.

That all depends on if the reduction slows due to mutations spreading etc. But I can see the 8th March back to school being a bit of a lockdown reduction fanfare too.

That might be the best graph I’ve seen since the start of this latest lockdown, I’ve no idea how accurate it is but it’s something tangible and with a timeline. It certainly backs up my hope that we should be seeing a tier system by early April.

[a m ole]

devils advocate, but were there not conversations previously about how unfair it would have been to expect the old and vulnerable to isolate from life so that people who aren’t at any severe risk from covid can carry on with their daily lives? we’re all in this together.

I can fully see Stefan’s POV, a lot of people who have no huge need to be scared of covid have sacrificed a lot over the last year, and being the last to have some freedom would be a huge kick in the teeth. I don’t think sarcastic comments about Ibiza are particularly fair.

Edited February 12, 2021 by a m ole

[darrenm]

7 minutes ago, AVFCDAN said:

That might be the best graph I’ve seen since the start of this latest lockdown, I’ve no idea how accurate it is but it’s something tangible and with a timeline. It certainly backs up my hope that we should be seeing a tier system by early April.

It seems to hit 0 on the 7th March. While that's very unlikely because we won't be hitting 0 for a long time and it'll plateau before that, it'll be interesting to see what difference today's data makes to that date. I've kept everything after the 4th Feb off that chart because it's listed as incomplete data. With more complete data that 0 day may move backwards or forwards.

[Genie]

26 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Again, I'm struggling to see the selfishness.

We are all human, we need social norms, we need normal lives back.

I would say protesting against the first, or even second lockdown displayed a degree of selfishness, but FFS guys, we're a year in. I don't think it's selfish to want even a glimmer of normality on the horizon after 12 months of lockdown. 

Of course it’s not selfish to want it, but you gotta be realistic. It would be madness to let everyone (vaccinated and unvaccinated) just travel the world freely purely because it’s fairer that way. The last year would have been for nothing.

It’s all hypothetical anyway because the recurring message from the powers that be is for everyone to forget about holidays for a few months.

[sidcow]

I still think everyone will have had at least one shot before travel is opened up anyway. 

In the next few months vaccine production is going to ramp up significantly. Pvizer will have done their factory rebuild in Belgium, AZ will have got their European factories into gear, Moderna is on the way and isn't there another one due shortly? 

We're still in early days, Europe are behind but by March/April the landscape will look very different. 

I'm sure they will allow travel with a negative test to locations who have their epedemics under reasonable control. 

[HanoiVillan]

1 hour ago, Xela said:

I've got a feeling that schools won't go back until after the Easter break. Few clients I have spoken to, who work with schools, think the same. 

Possible . . . I don't really know which way they will go. They are probably hating that expert opinion seems roughly equally torn between the risk of mixing and the desire to keep things shut on the one hand, and the damage being done by school closures on the other, because at previous points in the pandemic the public mood and scientific sentiment have tended to move in concert, emphasising one or the other, and generally this government prefer to follow popular sentiment rather than lead it or challenge it.

1 hour ago, sharkyvilla said:

Indeed, also the whole idea of having a vaccine passport sounds very difficult and expensive to actually implement plus we would likely all have had our jab by the time they get round to rolling it out anyway.

This seems like a very good point, and I'm not sure that it has received enough attention. The idea that there is such a thing as a 'vaccine passport' program that we can simply pull off the shelf is not correct; it will need setting up, and immigration officials will presumably need training to learn to process arrivals based on dates of vaccinations for different vaccines, and on and on.

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

However, we’ve all seen the reaction on this board to any suggestion we don’t all try to fly to Ibiza this July.

Have we? I'm not really sure what you're referring to, but I have tried to be quite clear at every stage that this is *not* simply a question of holidays. There are 9.4 million people in the UK who were born in another country; a larger proportion who have family overseas; another group who would otherwise be travelling for work and study; and British citizens and residents overseas who would like to return home, but cannot afford hotel quarantine. All of those groups exist, even without the question of holidays.

51 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Got to be honest I would have thought the last 12 months would have changed people's perception of fairness. 

Lots of things haven't been fair. Its not fair that NHS staff have had to deal with a pandemic, whilst being terribly underfunded. Its not fair that kids have lost huge amounts of time away from schools. Its not fair that people have lost family members who were fit and healthy and not meant to die from this. Its not fair that people have lost jobs and money and spiralled into depression. Lots of things aren't fair but this is what something like this causes. 

Some people might have more freedom than me as we continue to try and protect the vulnerable and the NHS. Yeah probably not fair but to me it still sounds like the right thing to do. 

I think the question of 'fairness' in the past is a bit of a road to nowhere; we are where we are. The relevant questions around fairness are the question of what is best going forward. What I am concerned about is a shifting of goalposts, from the justifications previously given for these unprecedented measures which was 'flattening the curve' and ensuring that healthcare systems are not overwhelmed, to a *preventative* focus on avoiding mutations and so on. Lockdowns, extreme social distancing and border closures are failure policies that were and are only justfified as a last resort to address our failure to control the spread of the virus at a level below healthcare capacity, and once that changes for me the justification does not exist. Obviously we aren't there yet, but it seems unlikely to me that the healthcare system will be in this danger by June. And I think at that point - or really by that point - there is a real debate to be had about the risks of international travel (which to be clear, is going to start again at some point) versus the human cost of border closures.

[chrisp65]

Just in case my comments have been garbled by me.

I’m not suggesting anyone’s wish for a holiday is wrong, and I’m certainly not suggesting the young and fit should be held back whilst the older and the weaker get to party like it’s 1999. That would be unfair.

I’m trying to point out, that any overseas travel is risky at present whilst the virus is so widespread overseas that there are still plentiful mutations to contend with. So anyone travelling, could in theory, bring back a variant that undoes all the sacrifice.

We need to understand that risk. The young and the old, the vaccinated and the tested, they would be sitting on a plane to a destination where there is no way you can guarantee all locals and all staff and all visitors from all other countries are infection free.

Now, there’s obviously a tipping point, where the risk reduces to a point where the benefit is greater.

I’m just not sure June / July we will have crossed that tipping point. But I would bloody love to be wrong.

[StefanAVFC]

I would bloody love to go and see my wider family in the UK by June/July if I'm honest, feel a bit stuck over here.

[HanoiVillan]

Today's Times:

Article is here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britain-and-the-us-are-at-odds-over-saudi-arms-sales-tcm2b9vxk

Most of it is the PM's official spokesperson's husband - which conflict of interest is, as always, unaddressed - giving 'if we don't do it, the French will' as a reason to keep arming Saudi Arabia, but the on-topic bit of the article is an amusing part included in the tweet here where he accuses the EU of 'flirting with both vaccine nationalism and the Russian jab', if you want to know how impervious to irony these guys are.

[LondonLax]

3 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

Although, the y'know, not dying thing helps to even that up a bit so...swings and roundabouts eh?

I think it's fair to say it's been shit for everyone.

 

Yeah I’d say in a game of COVID pandemic top trumps ‘not being old’ is a pretty significant hand to be holding. 

[AVFC_Hitz]

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

I would bloody love to go and see my wider family in the UK by June/July if I'm honest, feel a bit stuck over here.

Me too mate, it's getting to me a lot. I've a 6 month old girl who hasn't seen her grandparents. 

I'm more than willing to do my bit and wait. I'm currently on dose 1 of the Moderna vaccine and I really hope this is all over soon.

There's only so much cheap Eastern European booze you can drink. 

[blandy]

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

Again, I'm struggling to see the selfishness.

We are all human, we need social norms, we need normal lives back.

I would say protesting against the first, or even second lockdown displayed a degree of selfishness, but FFS guys, we're a year in. I don't think it's selfish to want even a glimmer of normality on the horizon after 12 months of lockdown. 

Exploring the "selfishness" argument a little - would you say it is "Selfish" to deny other people the ability to have a holiday, just because you (say) can't have one just yet and have to wait a bit longer?

1 hour ago, a m ole said:

devils advocate, but were there not conversations previously about how unfair it would have been to expect the old and vulnerable to isolate from life so that people who aren’t at any severe risk from covid can carry on with their daily lives? we’re all in this together.

And on this point, many of the most vulnerable to the disease have isolated from life to a larger degree than everyone else. Whatever the law or government said, or people felt generally, those older people have been the most isolated, the most alone and suffered the biggest consequences of lockdowns and tiers and all the rest of it. It has been massive for everyone, sure, but those people seem to me to have had the biggest burden in many ways. They've had the biggest fear of dying or serious illness, they've had a huge percentage of their remaining years taken away from them - unable to see kinds and grandkids, lacking social contact and so on.

I think, personally, that we have to be pragmatic - so the elderly isolating more strictly was pragmatic. Vaccinating them first was a pragmatic decision (though I'd have done medics and associated genuine key workers first, then moved o not care homes, then the other elderly). And if allowing the group of people who have been vaccinated to travel saves some tourist industry jobs and other jobs, then pragmatically the sooner it can be done, safely, the better, regardless of notions or feelings of fairness. It wasn't "fair" that some areas had tiers imposed for longer or more stringently, than others, or that it wasn't done  to London when London had a higher R rate than when it was done to Manchester or wherever. It isn't fair that the virus impacts the poor, minorities, elderly more than the young or wealthy. It isn't fair that...well none of it is fair, frankly.

[darrenm]

2 hours ago, darrenm said:

Assuming the deaths keep reducing in a linear fashion (they seem to be) then we should be down to very few in the first week in March.

That all depends on if the reduction slows due to mutations spreading etc. But I can see the 8th March back to school being a bit of a lockdown reduction fanfare too.

Adding 3 more days in which have been marked as complete data brings the 0 day point to exactly 2 weeks time. As said above, it won't be, but deaths are still falling in a steady linear rate, possibly now falling faster

[a m ole]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

And on this point, many of the most vulnerable to the disease have isolated from life to a larger degree than everyone else. Whatever the law or government said, or people felt generally, those older people have been the most isolated, the most alone and suffered the biggest consequences of lockdowns and tiers and all the rest of it. It has been massive for everyone, sure, but those people seem to me to have had the biggest burden in many ways. They've had the biggest fear of dying or serious illness, they've had a huge percentage of their remaining years taken away from them - unable to see kinds and grandkids, lacking social contact and so on.

the extremely old and vulnerable had to isolate anyway even after we opened up and it has unbelievably horrible for them, granted. however, 90% of deaths have been the over 65s. deaths and hospitalisations exploded over christmas, that must have been mostly older people not classed as extremely vulnerable and isolating regardless of the tiers. the prioritising of the vaccines is certainly correct. a policy of keeping over 50s locked down away from the under 50s could have been extremely effective at reducing deaths and keeping the economy going but we didn’t because it seems unpalatable.

young people have been unbelievably unselfish in taking the sacrifices they have done, the frustration is in choosing this version of pragmatism that puts them in the doing it for others camp, again.

as we’ve all said though, this is all based on this hypothetical vaccine passport.

Edited February 12, 2021 by a m ole

[blandy]

1 hour ago, a m ole said:

young people have been unbelievably unselfish in taking the sacrifices they have done, the frustration is in choosing this version of pragmatism that puts them in the doing it for others camp, again.

Yeah, they largely have. Everyone largely has been unselfish. No quibbles with that.

Would you not issue vaccine passports at all? or wait till absolutely everyone has been jagged? or 90% or 80% or where would you draw the line.

If you don't issue them, and (say) Spain requires people to have proof of a jab in order to visit there, would you deny people the possibility of getting a "vaccine passport" and effectively make them stay in the UK?

Surely, acceptance of giving people an official record of being vaccinated as part of getting the world back to some kind of normal is going to have to be a part of it?

[bickster]

Good luck with getting travel insurance that covers COVID to travel abroad in the near future, You can't even rely on your EU medical rights you had until January

[LondonLax]

4 hours ago, darrenm said:

Adding 3 more days in which have been marked as complete data brings the 0 day point to exactly 2 weeks time. As said above, it won't be, but deaths are still falling in a steady linear rate, possibly now falling faster

Looking forward to March when they start to go negative!

[LondonLax]

7 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

This seems like a very good point, and I'm not sure that it has received enough attention. The idea that there is such a thing as a 'vaccine passport' program that we can simply pull off the shelf is not correct; it will need setting up, and immigration officials will presumably need training to learn to process arrivals based on dates of vaccinations for different vaccines, and on and on.

It will just be a QR code you receive on your phone. China do this for people who have been cleared to visit shops and bars etc. Scan your phone at the door to be allowed entry.

[mjmooney]

Latest TV ad for Flash cleaner - "Kill covid-19 with Flash anti-bacterial". 

It's a a **** ing virus, it's not bacteria! 

[a m ole]

2 hours ago, blandy said:

Yeah, they largely have. Everyone largely has been unselfish. No quibbles with that.

Would you not issue vaccine passports at all? or wait till absolutely everyone has been jagged? or 90% or 80% or where would you draw the line.

If you don't issue them, and (say) Spain requires people to have proof of a jab in order to visit there, would you deny people the possibility of getting a "vaccine passport" and effectively make them stay in the UK?

Surely, acceptance of giving people an official record of being vaccinated as part of getting the world back to some kind of normal is going to have to be a part of it?

i don’t know, but we all know the horse bolted a few times on doing the most sensible or economic thing.

to be honest, once the uk and spain have both vaccinated everyone over say 50 (i admit that’s an arbitrary age i picked), why would we not look at opening the borders anyway? theoretically there should be no increased risk.*
 

*or at least no increased risk of overwhelmed hospitals etc which is what lockdowns and shut borders were for.

Edited February 12, 2021 by a m ole