Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[vikingTON]

16 minutes ago, No_Problemo said:

That the vaccine stops transmission by 60%, and lockdown measures and completely lifted in mid February. 
 

Not exactly working, but the hypothetical scenario that will lead to that amount of deaths by April. 

Back of a fag packet nonsense, floated by Downing Street to fend off the anti-lockdown right of the Tory party then. Completely irrelevant to any plausible scenario. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by vikingTON

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

I don't think anyone other than nutter Desmond Swayne types are advocating the complete lifting of restrictions by mid Feb.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

3 minutes ago, Sherrif John Bunnell said:

I don't think anyone other than nutter Desmond Swayne types are advocating the complete lifting of restrictions by mid Feb.

Nope, absolutely not, keep us even as we are until the end of March, nae bother, I get it! But when the most vulnerable are done, when the hospital rates are down, when deaths and transmission are down then get it opened up. 

[Elixir]

Have they modelled all the other damages another full year of this insanity would entail? Is there a full cost-benefit analysis provided?

There will never be a right time for these fucking clowns. If the number of deaths predicted fall within normal scalable hospital capacity, then the restrictions should be in the bin.

Shutting up shop for another 12 months to maybe give some 80+ year olds another year or two just isn't going to cut it, I'm afraid.

[Burnieman]

No furlough = No lockdown

This is the Covid backstop.

[Glen Sannox]

45 minutes ago, Erih Shtrep said:

I would have full sexy intercourse with Carrie on a bed or in my car.  I'd switch off the child lock to allow her to exit the offside front seat and enter the offside back seat.  I've a 5 door.   

Confirmation as if we needed it, that you really are weird and unfunny.

[heedthebaa]

We will all be cutting aboot like Brooks Hatlen when they let us loose 

[8MileBU]

18 minutes ago, heedthebaa said:

We will all be cutting aboot like Brooks Hatlen when they let us loose 

It’d be a fitting way to mark a century since the original era, so I sincerely hope it’ll be like the seconding incarnation of The Roaring Twenties. Mostly hoping the “Flapper” enjoys a resurgence.

[tamthebam]

5 hours ago, Elixir said:

Does Devi know there is still community transmission even in New Zealand, Australia, and Taiwan? And it is the height of summer in the southern hemisphere. It's going to be some laugh when winter returns and they're back in a four month Melbourne-esque prison setting over a few hundred cases.

To be fair being a prisoner is an Australian tradition.

[David W]

This sort of nonsense is why there should be a clear roadmap set out by the government in the near future. We can all accept deviation from that in exceptional circumstances (we've seen that with the more transmissible variant) but they should have a fair idea now about vaccine roll out, herd immunity and the like and what the path in the future should be.

It's literally dangerous for people's mental health having this constant back and forward from people who are known by the public as experts.

[Lyle Lanley]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/30/exclusive-social-distancing-may-have-remain-place-year/

Pretty depression read here.

Don't think most or near enough everyone will stand for this. 

[djchapsticks]

Jason Leitch, Devi Sridhar and any of these other rambling fantasists will ultimately be able to do f**k all to stop the end of restrictions. Their bleating about zero covid, things that may or may not come to pass and one year lockdowns will become background noise against the wall of experts in other areas such as finance, business and sociology whose voices will be overwhelmingly advising to open up again when the time is right and cases are low. Not to mention the public at large.

It's a very simple equation. Lockdowns will drive death and serious illness down to a low point and the ongoing vaccine programme will keep it there.

Only death and serious illness figures will matter. The overall infection numbers will naturally drop too but really, who actually gives a f**k about case numbers or infections if it's only going to give people, especially those will compromised immune systems, a very mild case of not feeling too well?

Folk like Leitch can feel their days in the spotlight coming to an end - I see it myself. A lot of small pharma companies I deal with came into a lot of money very quickly indeed last year and they are all beginning to forecast significant downturns in what they need in the coming quarters. They know their boom period (and believe me, it ha been an unprecedented boom period) is slowly coming to an end. Most pharma companies who provide DHSC overspill for covid testing are anticipating a much reduced need for test kits this year. I imagine DHSC (who I also deal with directly) will follow suit.

Edited January 31, 2021 by djchapsticks

[Theroadlesstravelled]

Person tests positive after receiving one dose of the vaccine and will self isolate.

He probably won’t get sick but he can pass it on to others who in turn might.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/30/politics/stephen-lynch-tests-positive-covid/index.html

[btb]

1 hour ago, Snafu said:

I need a hug.

tbf the Telegraph like most of the mainstream media are a bunch of miserable c**ts, there's an article below discussing should children be allowed to play outside during lockdown.

I've seen children out enjoying the snow during the lockdown, its very good for them and you would have to be a complete Arnold Rimmer to have any problem with that and Philipy them to the police.

 

But did you kick over their snowman?

[Paco]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/30/exclusive-social-distancing-may-have-remain-place-year/
Pretty depression read here.
Don't think most or near enough everyone will stand for this. 

That’s a depressing read, no doubt about it. I doubt the Telegraph have went to the effort of making up the paper. If that’s the advice the government are getting, it’s dreadful news. Genuinely dreadful.

Two key points though where they discuss how 25% of the population would still be vulnerable between vaccines not being 100% effective and people not taking it - the overwhelming majority of that number not taking it will be young, and at least not vulnerable. As will a large number of those getting ineffective vaccine, it won’t skew solely to the old and vulnerable. So the big scary number is already far lower then 25%. When the virus can only find about one in eight or one in ten people to infect, it’s already well on the way to tapering out. So what’s the big problem here? Some people will die in the interim period, obviously. That’s bad. But it certainly wouldn’t be at 1500 a day unless Covid has learned how to target those it can kill.

Additionally the ‘source’ outlines all the big scary numbers and basically says the vaccines will be shit, and then says social distancing may have to stay ‘until the end of the year’ as a result. At which stage a magic wand will be waved, presumably? What would’ve actually changed between the big scary scenario in April where virtually everyone most at risk has been vaccinated, and January 1st 2022 where they’re, er, still vaccinated?

[Ron Aldo]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/30/exclusive-social-distancing-may-have-remain-place-year/
Pretty depression read here.
Don't think most or near enough everyone will stand for this. 

I'm struggling to get my head round that.

If restrictions were lifted in February (which they obviously won't be) why would we be looking at our highest daily death totals if the majority of the vulnerable have been vaccinated by then?

Likewise, if theres a "gradual release" of restrictions why do 3 of the 4 graphs have deaths peaking at 2000+ a day in the summer? Last summer I don't think we even had 2000 cases a day never mind deaths, and that was without a vaccine.

[djchapsticks]

2 minutes ago, Paco said:

That’s a depressing read, no doubt about it. I doubt the Telegraph have went to the effort of making up the paper. If that’s the advice the government are getting, it’s dreadful news. Genuinely dreadful.

Two key points though where they discuss how 25% of the population would still be vulnerable between vaccines not being 100% effective and people not taking it - the overwhelming majority of that number not taking it will be young, and at least not vulnerable. As will a large number of those getting ineffective vaccine, it won’t skew solely to the old and vulnerable. So the big scary number is already far lower then 25%. When the virus can only find about one in eight or one in ten people to infect, it’s already well on the way to tapering out. So what’s the big problem here? Some people will die in the interim period, obviously. That’s bad. But it certainly wouldn’t be at 1500 a day unless Covid has learned how to target those it can kill.

Additionally the ‘source’ outlines all the big scary numbers and basically says the vaccines will be shit, and then says social distancing may have to stay ‘until the end of the year’ as a result. At which stage a magic wand will be waved, presumably? What would’ve actually changed between the big scary scenario in April where virtually everyone most at risk has been vaccinated, and January 1st 2022 where they’re, er, still vaccinated?

Although the paper is genuine, the narrative behind it is purely the media's ultra pessimistic interpretation of it. 

I would honestly not pay too much heed to the Telegraph under any circumstances. 

 

[Donathan]

That telegraph article is based on a scenario showing what would happen if literally all restrictions were lifted in mid February.

Absolutely no one is suggesting that.

Scaremongering clickbait pish

[welshbairn]

I thought the three approved vaccines were all claiming 100% protection against serious disease, ie. leading to death. J&J's drops a bit.

[ICTChris]