Generic Virus Thread

[Davkaus]

2 minutes ago, sidcow said:

I'm confused. The graph shw deaths below 200 already but we were at 323 today? 

We dipped below over the weekend, that graph only seems to go up until the 22nd

[Davkaus]

3 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Pretty important day, one year ago today:

 

The court dates can't be far away, right?  

[sidcow]

Just now, Davkaus said:

We dipped below over the weekend, that graph only seems to go up until the 22nd

Oh yes, gotcha. 

[cheltenham_villa]

52 minutes ago, fightoffyour said:

Does this mean that I don’t need to receive a letter to book a vaccination (I don’t live where I’m registered, or even in the country, and probably can’t get a letter from there), but that a letter should let me know when I’m eligible to book?

you need to be invited, the best way is to make sure your doctor has you mobile number on file and you'll receive a text. Around by me they are doing really well at rolling out the jabs, often the text messages are very far ahead of the letters though. I think this is because letters are centrally distributed in batches vs text which is locally distibuted based on supply and demand. My village has about 15000 people and is vaccinating 500 per day. Doesnt take long. 

[Genie]

My wife got the text today, it said “you’ll have had the letter already” but it arrived today also.

My mother in law has had letter but no text yet.

[darrenm]

1 hour ago, sidcow said:

I'm confused. The graph shows deaths below 200 already but we were at 323 today? 

 

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

We dipped below over the weekend, that graph only seems to go up until the 22nd

Nah it doesn't work like that. The daily headline figure means very little. The actual data is here: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths click the data heading and you'll see how many deaths are recorded daily. Today's isn't there yet because they can't have counted them all yet. Which is why the data gets more accurate for each day after 2 or 3 days and I don't include them.

The figure of 323 today is the newly recorded deaths. That 323 could be 2 extra 10 days ago, 3 extra 9 days ago, 5 extra 8 days ago, 40 extra 4 days ago etc. How many happened yesterday or today won't be accurate until 2 or 3 day's time. Which is why I don't include the last 2 or 3 days which is incomplete data. 

For example, yesterday's was actually 80, but as the graph shows, it'll be more like 200. 

So you can't really take much notice of the daily headline newly recorded deaths figure because it's artificially low at the weekends and artificially high on weekdays.

[Kingman]

3 hours ago, fightoffyour said:

Does this mean that I don’t need to receive a letter to book a vaccination (I don’t live where I’m registered, or even in the country, and probably can’t get a letter from there), but that a letter should let me know when I’m eligible to book?

My missus never got call or letter, Just checked the eligibility via that link and then selected a location for 1st and 2nd jabs.

[Kingman]

2 hours ago, cheltenham_villa said:

you need to be invited, the best way is to make sure your doctor has you mobile number on file and you'll receive a text. Around by me they are doing really well at rolling out the jabs, often the text messages are very far ahead of the letters though. I think this is because letters are centrally distributed in batches vs text which is locally distibuted based on supply and demand. My village has about 15000 people and is vaccinating 500 per day. Doesnt take long. 

As mentioned above, My missus never got call, text or letter ect, Just checked her eligibility via that link on NHS website and then selected a location for 1st and 2nd jabs. 

Edited February 25, 2021 by Kingman

[markavfc40]

Just watching Grant Shapps on QT saying the British people have been through so much this last year we do not want to blow it now. I'd say we, or should I say the government, blew it around a year ago didn't they which is why we have ended up with one of the highest death rates in the world and taken one of the biggest hits economically and face one of the bleakest economic outlooks. 

They are going to try and spin the narrative, off the back of the vaccine, that they have played a bit of a blinder and some will fall for it. 

[bannedfromHandV]

10 hours ago, markavfc40 said:

Just watching Grant Shapps on QT saying the British people have been through so much this last year we do not want to blow it now. I'd say we, or should I say the government, blew it around a year ago didn't they which is why we have ended up with one of the highest death rates in the world and taken one of the biggest hits economically and face one of the bleakest economic outlooks. 

They are going to try and spin the narrative, off the back of the vaccine, that they have played a bit of a blinder and some will fall for it. 

I’ll wager around 52% of the country will fall for it.

[Stevo985]

12 hours ago, markavfc40 said:

Just watching Grant Shapps on QT saying the British people have been through so much this last year we do not want to blow it now. I'd say we, or should I say the government, blew it around a year ago didn't they which is why we have ended up with one of the highest death rates in the world and taken one of the biggest hits economically and face one of the bleakest economic outlooks. 

They are going to try and spin the narrative, off the back of the vaccine, that they have played a bit of a blinder and some will fall for it. 

Of course they will. Hancock has already started gaslighting the public into believing there was no shortage of PPE last year.

It's like when they tried to claim the original lockdown started a week or two earlier than it did

[icouldtelltheworld]

12 hours ago, markavfc40 said:

Just watching Grant Shapps on QT saying the British people have been through so much this last year we do not want to blow it now. I'd say we, or should I say the government, blew it around a year ago didn't they which is why we have ended up with one of the highest death rates in the world and taken one of the biggest hits economically and face one of the bleakest economic outlooks. 

They are going to try and spin the narrative, off the back of the vaccine, that they have played a bit of a blinder and some will fall for it. 

Been saying this for weeks. They're going to be very cautious about easing lockdown so they can ride the wave of optimism from the vaccine afterwards. People have short memories, so if they can end things on a high note then for a lot of people that will end up being their enduring perception of the job done by the government

[AlwaysAVFC]

On 24/02/2021 at 12:50, AlwaysAVFC said:

My wife got the call last week to have her vaccination (today). She questioned her eligibility as she is 33. It was because she had gestational diabetes, while pregnant and they strongly recommend she did it now rather than wait. Which is fine and makes sense, they are doing some of the most vaccinations in the country here so getting well through the priority list.

Today however she also got a letter to tell her to shield. Just seems strange nearly a year after people started shielding, they have now decided she should shield, even allowing for the fact we moved and changed doctors 6 months ago.

 

So she has now had a letter to say she shouldn't shield and shouldn't of had the invite for the vaccination either (which she's had) although they are honouring the offer even for ones booked in but haven't received it yet.

[Chindie]

Vaccine part one done.

[ender4]

40-49 year olds next in line for vaccine jabs - priority band 10 i guess.

[sidcow]

The job v age dilemma is a tough one isn't it. 

You have to question why a fit 25 year old teacher or policeman who are extremely unlikely to get seriously ill should get vaccinated ahead of a 49 year old who is far more likely to get ill. 

But they are putting themselves out there and exposed, much more so than me for example. 

Ultimately I still feel age is the way to go, each vaccine works the most efficiently at protecting the NHS that way. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by sidcow

[chrisp65]

I’ve just had cause to give someone else a copy of the paperwork I’ve been using for my travels since last September. I thought oh I better read it through in case it’s specific to me in some way.

Clearly I haven’t previously read beyond the first paragraph, and clearly neither have any of the people I’ve had to show it to.

The letter doesn’t actually say I’m legit allowed to swan around the country and stay in hotels. It actually says I’m allowed to have my kids in school and I’m a key worker. The letter is wrong, I’ve given or shown copies of it to around 15 / 20 people over the last 6 months and nobody has questioned it.

 

Anyway....about these vaccine passports...I’m pretty confident they’ll be fool proof.

[ender4]

1 hour ago, sidcow said:

The job v age dilemma is a tough one isn't it. 

You have to question why a fit 25 year old teacher or policeman who are extremely unlikely to get seriously ill should get vaccinated ahead of a 49 year old who is far more likely to get ill. 

But they are putting themselves out there and exposed, much more so than me for example. 

Ultimately I still feel age is the way to go, each vaccine works the most efficiently at protecting the NHS that way. 

It seems fair to do it by age for the following reasons:

- Its simpler for admin purposes.  People will get vaccinated faster if admin stays as simple as possible.

- 40-49 males are triple the risk of ending up in ICU compared to a 35 year old female teacher.    Overall 40-49 age are twice as likely as 30-39 age group to end up in ICU.

- They don't think teachers are particularly at higher risk than numerous other professions.  The 21 year old girl serving the public in Tesco for example. 

- Once you start breaking down to professions there will be a lot of arguments over which professions are deserving or not.

- Its simpler for admin purposes.  People will get vaccinated faster if admin stays as simple as possible.

- Its hard to prove every person's profession, there would be a lot of attempted cheating and queue jumping.

- They think a 35 year old teacher will only be 2 weeks behind a 45 year old in getting the first vaccine, so due to the reasons above, its not worth the hassle to save a couple of weeks.

[sidcow]

So after a real slowing down in vaccinations last weekend and early this week the last 2 days have been right up there again. 

Today Hancock says he expects March to be a bumper month and 10 new large vaccination centres open next week.  Sounds like maybe Moderna is coming on line then? They said available from Spring. 

Maybe this is when we start doing 600k per day? 

Also the numbers of second jabs are ramping up I notice.  That's when much better protection starts to kick in and of course it's the most vulnerable getting it now. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by sidcow

[TrentVilla]

9 hours ago, sidcow said:

The job v age dilemma is a tough one isn't it. 

You have to question why a fit 25 year old teacher or policeman who are extremely unlikely to get seriously ill should get vaccinated ahead of a 49 year old who is far more likely to get ill. 

But they are putting themselves out there and exposed, much more so than me for example. 

Ultimately I still feel age is the way to go, each vaccine works the most efficiently at protecting the NHS that way. 

I don't think it is tough at all to be honest despite the huge noise made by and for teachers.

There is absolutely no statistical basis to support the call for education staff to be prioritised and quite a lot that says they shouldn't, had the Gov prioritised them it would have been a purely political decision. Well done them for standing firm.

I work in an industry connected to education and it isn't the teachers that have created the fuss it is the unions on a membership drive who have pushed this agenda. Teachers are no more on the front line that those who work in Sainsbury's.