Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Elixir]

3 minutes ago, MuckleMoo said:

Thought the thread could do with a bit of cheering up

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-breakthrough-treatment-claims-to-stop-100-of-symptomatic-infections-12200072

The fact that the treatment appears to have saved Donald Trump is a bit of a downer but otherwise the results appear to be really encouraging.

Is this treatment at all related to what potentially led to the mutation down in Kent? I can't remember if it was monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma.

[vikingTON]

Just now, Detournement said:

Apparently we need 70% to protect the 30% of vulnerable people for whom the vaccine won't work. 

The vaccines are more than 70% effective at preventing serious illness. That 30% of people might get a glorified cold for a few days is not a significant public health problem. 

[Todd_is_God]

8 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

Not the entire population, though.

No, we offer it to those most vulnerable to flu.

There's also little to suggest would need to be an annual exercise either, given people were observed to still be resistant to SARS.

[MuckleMoo]

Is this treatment at all related to what potentially led to the mutation down in Kent? I can't remember if it was monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma.

You'll need to ask a virologist, I haven't got a fucking clue!

[Big Fifer]

8 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

The tier system would be better tbh, because it’s likely they can bring that in much sooner than a full reopening of things. That Boris is talking about schools reopening is possibly the start of gradual loosening of restrictions.

I meant in the long term. If the road map's end point is somewhere with restrictions like social distancing etc still in place, then to me that's not acceptable. I agree we go back to tiers from March and slowly go down, but we need to go down to no restrictions eventually, as others have previously mentioned. Let me see the metric on which the Scottish/UK government's will say "we now accept there will always be a small risk of catching it, but we will live with that". 

[vikingTON]

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

Personally i'm finding it very hard to stomach the flip from

"don't be selfish, covid probably won't hurt you, but you might give it to and kill a vulnerable person"

to

"once we've protected the vulnerable, we aren't sure if they can give it to you" 

And I think i'm perfectly entitled to be angry about that.

Giving everyone the vaccine now is a goodwill gesture for tolerating this utter shite and if they have vaccines ordered and available then they might as well use them.

If Covid-25 or something rocks up out of the existing strain and requires a new vaccine then only vulnerable groups will need protection, in the exact same way as we don't vaccinate 65 million people against flu every year. The logistical challenge is the same. 

[Left Back]

7 minutes ago, Elixir said:

Is this treatment at all related to what potentially led to the mutation down in Kent? I can't remember if it was monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma.

Didn’t convalescent plasma get binned as a treatment?

ETA https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4072

Edited January 27, 2021 by Left Back

[Detournement]

30 minutes ago, Marshmallo said:

Alternatively people might have different priorities or interests in life than you and your views/lived experiences are not shared by every other person alive today?

I don't doubt there are some sad cases who would genuinely rather sit in a Disney Hotel for two weeks than be free to socialise for the majority of the year. They should be ignored though. 

Given the large proportion of the population who don't go abroad in a given year (especially this year) then focusing on keeping domestic restrictions to a minimum clearly has by far the greatest utility. 

[Elixir]

3 minutes ago, Big Fifer said:

I meant in the long term. If the road map's end point is somewhere with restrictions like social distancing etc still in place, then to me that's not acceptable. I agree we go back to tiers from March and slowly go down, but we need to go down to no restrictions eventually, as others have previously mentioned. Let me see the metric on which the Scottish/UK government's will say "we now accept there will always be a small risk of catching it, but we will live with that". 

I have a feeling it will take countries on the continent and/or the US to do this first, before we follow. One thing for sure is that Scotland definitely won't act first, sadly.

[HeartsOfficialMoaner]

2 minutes ago, Detournement said:

I don't doubt there are some sad cases who would genuinely rather sit in a Disney Hotel for two weeks than be free to socialise for the majority of the year. They should be ignored though. 

Given the large proportion of the population who don't go abroad in a given year (especially this year) then focusing on keeping domestic restrictions to a minimum clearly has by far the greatest utility. 

And people who have family outside the UK? 

That'll be essential travel?

[Elixir]

2 minutes ago, Detournement said:

I don't doubt there are some sad cases who would genuinely rather sit in a Disney Hotel for two weeks than be free to socialise for the majority of the year. They should be ignored though. 

Given the large proportion of the population who don't go abroad in a given year (especially this year) then focusing on keeping domestic restrictions to a minimum clearly has by far the greatest utility. 

Besides your fantasy that we will have anything like domestic normality this year regardless of international travel, I think you'll find holidays are a necessity to the majority of the population, not a luxury. This isn't the 1950s. About 18 million UK nationals visited Spain alone in 2019.

[Jambomo]

16 minutes ago, Left Back said:

She’s playing to the gallery.  
 

Out of interest what would you call a product made in Britain by a British company that has a contractual obligation to deliver to the British government?

International, since they are a uk-Swedish company, and they have contractual obligations to deliver to other countries as well. It doesn’t make the vaccine “ours” in the way Laura K was trying to make out.

 

Edited January 27, 2021 by Jambomo

[Left Back]

5 minutes ago, Detournement said:

I don't doubt there are some sad cases who would genuinely rather sit in a Disney Hotel for two weeks than be free to socialise for the majority of the year. They should be ignored though. 

Given the large proportion of the population who don't go abroad in a given year (especially this year) then focusing on keeping domestic restrictions to a minimum clearly has by far the greatest utility. 

Why does it have to be one or the other?  International travel can be allowed with mitigations while domestically things return to normal.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

2 minutes ago, Elixir said:

Besides your fantasy that we will have anything like domestic normality this year regardless of international travel, I think you'll find holidays are a necessity to the majority of the population, not a luxury. This isn't the 1950s. About 18 million UK nationals visited Spain alone in 2019.

I actually feel safer holidaying abroad, got a wee villa in Turkey last year, didnt see a soul for 10 days except at the supermarket and the flight was empty, contrast that with blackpool beach or pontins, I know where i’d rather be. 

[Detournement]

Just now, Elixir said:

Besides your fantasy that we will have anything like domestic normality this year regardless of international travel, I think you'll find holidays are a necessity to the majority of the population, not a luxury. This isn't the 1950s. About 18 million UK nationals visited Spain alone in 2019.

If a holiday abroad is genuinely a psychological necessity for some people then it's a sad state of affairs. The lack of imagination to figure out how to have a good time in the UK is also pretty pathetic.

 

 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Detournement said:

I don't doubt there are some sad cases who would genuinely rather sit in a Disney Hotel for two weeks than be free to socialise for the majority of the year. They should be ignored though. 

Given the large proportion of the population who don't go abroad in a given year (especially this year) then focusing on keeping domestic restrictions to a minimum clearly has by far the greatest utility. 

Taking the mickey ?

[Sergeant Wilson]

4 minutes ago, Elixir said:

About 18 million UK nationals visited Spain alone in 2019.

Did any of them meet up at night?

[Left Back]

2 minutes ago, Jambomo said:

International, since they are a uk-Swedish company, and they have contractual obligations to deliver to other countries as well. It doesn’t make the vaccine “ours” in the way Laura K was trying to make out.

 

According to the chief exec they don’t have this for the EU.  It’s being reported that the details of the contract can’t be revealed by AZ.  This would indicate it’s the EU that have something to hide here and not AZ.  Of course without seeing the contract none of us will know what is actually true.

[Detournement]

2 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

I actually feel safer holidaying abroad, got a wee villa in Turkey last year, didnt see a soul for 10 days except at the supermarket and the flight was empty, contrast that with blackpool beach or pontins, I know where i’d rather be. 

Aye Blackpool and Pontins are the whole of the UK. 

[Burnieman]

21 minutes ago, Elixir said:

Yeah, the folk thinking that if we destroy international travel, tourism, and aviation, it will mean 'back to normal' domestically, are living in a dream world. Even despite the vaccine uptake, I think this summer is still going to have the same sanitised experience when going to bars and restaurants, attractions, etc. Absolutely soul destroying.

To be honest, BJ and the Tories are wanting business back and furlough off the table asap, as things stand the latter will be off the table come 1st May.

We saw last year they misjudged it badly, "eat out to help out" etc etc. they (probably) won't make that same mistake but neither will they go full right turn and do the exact opposite, as it appears NS wants them to do, and remain ultra cautious.

Therefore, if the whole travel industry is operating without furlough come May, they need to be back operating at a sustainable level otherwise there will be huge redundancies.  That means flights and holidays, and they may include that in the release of their roadmap next month. Part of that will be the ressurection of travel corridors with perhaps restrictions to limit it those who have been vaccinated.

What NS does next will be interesting, she won't like that but doesn't control UK borders.