Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[LamieRobertson]

I have zero problem with ALL the sections of society reopening, nightclubs et al. It is personal choice if you go to a nightclub, festival, the football or whatever, but for many vulnerable people using public transport for appointments or going to the shops for supplies isn't a choice.

Continuing with masks in those situations, at this moment of the pandemic may have been a sensible move...

You are trying to find middle ground there

 

[darkwolf666]

You are trying to find middle ground there

I know, never make a politician as I don't appeal to one rabid side or the other - mind you, I guess I could be a Liberal

 

[beorhthelm]

Continuing with masks in those situations, at this moment of the pandemic may have been a sensible move...

i do agree in principle. however no one enforced the restriction, and openly allowed people to disregard the law. did you know non-licenced premises are not allowed to refuse entry to those without masks? couldn't have people needing to prove they have a condition, that would impinge on rights. since there is no appetite to enforce the restriction, makes little sense to continue the pretence. its still an option for people to wear a proper mask on transport and at the shops, giving more protection than relying on others using non-standard face covering.

 

[LamieRobertson]

I know, never make a politician as I don't appeal to one rabid side or the other - mind you, I guess I could be a Liberal

On a slightly more serious note ….cards on table I am looking forward to not wearing a mask (if it comes to pass) in shops…I was a little surprised that public transport isn’t retaining them..but would add that I don’t use it, so domestic effect me either way..I also tend to shop when it’s not busy …things like a “vulnerable” person travelling for appointments..maybe support should be given..such as free taxi rides with masks? I guess with shopping if someone suggested free home deliveries you might say that then alienates you from society by not allowing you to visit shops……and so on. I do think somewhere along the line government has to be more imaginative in helping those they categorised for shielding last year ..their problems havnt gone away.

 

[Chicken Run]

Still, what could possibly go wrong with trusting the instincts and common sense of a population which two years ago was calling 999 because KFC ran out of chicken...

Population or 1 person?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Billy the Fish]

Ah, a binary choice, you mean like life or death?

Masks on public transport would have seemed a sensible move for a while longer as would masks in shops, a heck of a lot scientists appear to agree with this stance, with the Delta variant rising and not just the lockdowners - this all reminds me of the old adage of throwing the baby out with the bath water!!!

As for life's restrictions, I would imagine you wear a seat belt in a car, don't drink then drive, don't use a mobile phone while at the wheel of a motor vehicle - restrictions that most of us happily sign up for in just one facet of our lives, but restrictions all the same.

I'm not really talking about masks, that is a tiny part of this. Masks on public transport seems like a good idea and I'm sure most will still wear them, I probably will.

I'm talking about the specific life changing restrictions. Closed offices, closed businesses, 1m rule. The half way house we're currently in doesn't stop the spread of Delta so what's the point in trying something that doesn't work? We either lock down indefinitely to stop transmission or we lift restrictions fully.

I don't see where the halfway house is at this point

*edit* I'll add that I'd like to see much more support for people in your situation, it's not right just leaving the vulnerable to fend for themselves.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

https://twitter.com/drericding/status/1412089591931285512?s=21

Was he the guy that called for USA schools to be shut then moved his kid to Austria to get a proper education?

Called Texas a death cult for lifting masks?

Been called out by the author of research as misrepresenting it?

Lied about U.K. schools?

 

[LamieRobertson]

Was he the guy that called for USA schools to be shut then moved his kid to Austria to get a proper education?

Called Texas a death cult for lifting masks?

Been called out by the author of research as misrepresenting it?

Lied about U.K. schools?

That’s the one

 

[cheshunt seagull]

I have zero problem with ALL the sections of society reopening, nightclubs et al. It is personal choice if you go to a nightclub, festival, the football or whatever, but for many vulnerable people using public transport for appointments or going to the shops for supplies isn't a choice.

Continuing with masks in those situations, at this moment of the pandemic may have been a sensible move...

I totally agree and had hoped for this approach.

 

[Bozza]

I'm not really talking about masks, that is a tiny part of this. Masks on public transport seems like a good idea and I'm sure most will still wear them, I probably will.

I'm talking about the specific life changing restrictions. Closed offices, closed businesses, 1m rule. The half way house we're currently in doesn't stop the spread of Delta so what's the point in trying something that doesn't work? We either lock down indefinitely to stop transmission or we lift restrictions fully.

I don't see where the halfway house is at this point

*edit* I'll add that I'd like to see much more support for people in your situation, it's not right just leaving the vulnerable to fend for themselves.

I'd have thought the obvious halfway house is to vaccinate everyone who wants to be vaccinated, including kids (note: I'm not saying kids should be vaccinated, but if the vaccines are considered safe for kids, a decision that some other nations have arrived at, then allowing the option for those that want it) to create the biggest, strongest "immunity wall" that we possibly can, before releasing the handbrake any further.

With a fully-vaccinated rate of just over 50%, we still have c30m people in the UK with only very limited or absolutely no protection from the virus. That's a lot of people for the virus to potentially rip through, killing some and leaving others with long-term, possibly life-long, debilitating illness.

Now, I'm NOT saying waiting for this point is the right thing to do, but it does feel like the place where your "halfway house" is built.

 

[The Clamp]

Ah, a binary choice, you mean like life or death?

Masks on public transport would have seemed a sensible move for a while longer as would masks in shops, a heck of a lot scientists appear to agree with this stance, with the Delta variant rising and not just the lockdowners - this all reminds me of the old adage of throwing the baby out with the bath water!!!

As for life's restrictions, I would imagine you wear a seat belt in a car, don't drink then drive, don't use a mobile phone while at the wheel of a motor vehicle - restrictions that most of us happily sign up for in just one facet of our lives, but restrictions all the same.

I think you’ll find that masks will be required in many of those places.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Sajid Javid is stating time and time again in Parliament that masks are not necessary now we have a vaccine, so I wouldn't expect them to suddenly u turn.

 

[Billy the Fish]

I'd have thought the obvious halfway house is to vaccinate everyone who wants to be vaccinated, including kids (note: I'm not saying kids should be vaccinated, but if the vaccines are considered safe for kids, a decision that some other nations have arrived at, then allowing the option for those that want it) to create the biggest, strongest "immunity wall" that we possibly can, before releasing the handbrake any further.

With a fully-vaccinated rate of just over 50%, we still have c30m people in the UK with only very limited or absolutely no protection from the virus. That's a lot of people for the virus to potentially rip through, killing some and leaving others with long-term, possibly life-long, debilitating illness.

Now, I'm NOT saying waiting for this point is the right thing to do, but it does feel like the place where your "halfway house" is built.

Which will take us up to spring 2022 because they can't risk an exit wave coupled with flu season in the winter.

By that point there's bound to be new variants of concern here or somewhere else in the world and there will be another reason to kick the can down the road.

Children are still only mildy affected by covid so IMHO we shouldn't wait for them to be vaccinated.

 

[darkwolf666]

I think you’ll find that masks will be required in many of those places.

I know Sadiq Khan has made noises about TFL and mask wearing, it will be interesting to see how it pans out, but the current situation just gives the **** wits who dont care more ammunition to say "why should I"...

 

[Bozza]

Which will take us up to spring 2022 because they can't risk an exit wave coupled with flu season in the winter.

By that point there's bound to be new variants of concern here or somewhere else in the world and there will be another reason to kick the can down the road.

Children are still only mildy affected by covid so IMHO we shouldn't wait for them to be vaccinated.

Once again, I'm NOT saying it it the solution, but it IS a halfway house between your scenarios of "unlock all the things now" and "lock everything up forever".

Maybe there will be variants of concern, maybe there won't. We'd have to see. Most of those involved with vaccines at a technical level and know what they're talking about, ie neither you nor me, seem to have relatively high confidence that the vaccines we have will prove effective at most mutations that could come our way. Further more when variants do emerge, it seems to be a relatively quick process to asses vaccine effectiveness against them in a lab. So, if everyone who wants to be vaccinated has had the chance to have both jabs and develop full protection, then we'd be as well-placed as we could be to deal with any such VOCs. Quite unlike now.

*Most* children are only mildly-affected by Covid, fortunately, but not all. Some will die but many, many more will suffer long-term, possible life-long, debilitating symptoms from "long Covid". I guess crossing our fingers that our own kids are amongst the lucky ones is a reasonable tactic though.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I know Sadiq Khan has made noises about TFL and mask wearing, it will be interesting to see how it pans out, but the current situation just gives the **** wits who dont care more ammunition to say "why should I"...

It gives them the ammunition to say something but they're not wearing them today. There's a small but noticeable group of mask refusniks who wouldn't stick one on if Boris himself was stood in front of them.

I do fully expect most people to be a bit more reasonable than that after 19/7 however. I will do pretty much what BoJo said. If I'm on a crowded bus, train or tube I will wear a mask. If I'm in a carriage on my own at 10pm then no, I probably won't keep it on. It was actually a very good example.

 

[Yoda]

I do fully expect most people to be a bit more reasonable than that after 19/7 however. I will do pretty much what BoJo said. If I'm on a crowded bus, train or tube I will wear a mask. If I'm in a carriage on my own at 10pm then no, I probably won't keep it on. It was actually a very good example.

Not that I will have a need to (unless it's going to and from the Amex) due to still being WFH until November (don't currently have an office base until then and even when we do, it will be a 3 minute walk down the road) that will be my approach too.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Once again, I'm NOT saying it it the solution, but it IS a halfway house between your scenarios of "unlock all the things now" and "lock everything up forever".

Maybe there will be variants of concern, maybe there won't. We'd have to see. Most of those involved with vaccines at a technical level and know what they're talking about, ie neither you nor me, seem to have relatively high confidence that the vaccines we have will prove effective at most mutations that could come our way. Further more when variants do emerge, it seems to be a relatively quick process to asses vaccine effectiveness against them in a lab. So, if everyone who wants to be vaccinated has had the chance to have both jabs and develop full protection, then we'd be as well-placed as we could be to deal with any such VOCs. Quite unlike now.

*Most* children are only mildly-affected by Covid, fortunately, but not all. Some will die but many, many more will suffer long-term, possible life-long, debilitating symptoms from "long Covid". I guess crossing our fingers that our own kids are amongst the lucky ones is a reasonable tactic though.

Just for balance, the total number of deaths of children under 15 with coronavirus, since this whole thing began, is 14. I don't know how many of those children were at clinical risk.

The average number of children who die of respiratory disease in the UK from 2001 to 2008 was 166. 38 who were not at known clinical risk, and 128 who were at clinical risk. There is no reason to suppose that this has materially changed.

The point being that for children, coronavirus is far less serious than the other respiratory diseases (like flu) that already exist. Therefore if the coronavirus as it stands now or as it was a year ago is enough to need precautions for the benefit of the children, then those precautions can never be lifted. It's fair enough to argue that children's bubbles should continue if it saves the lives of adults. But if we are trying to save the lives of the children, then we will need to have "bubbles" and isolation for their entire childhoods, because coronavirus is only a tiny part of their respiratory disease danger.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445313003733 see table 1 about half way down.

 

[e77]

Just for balance, the total number of deaths of children under 15 with coronavirus, since this whole thing began, is 14. I don't know how many of those children were at clinical risk.

The average number of children who die of respiratory disease in the UK from 2001 to 2008 was 166. 38 who were not at known clinical risk, and 128 who were at clinical risk. There is no reason to suppose that this has materially changed.

The point being that for children, coronavirus is far less serious than the other respiratory diseases (like flu) that already exist. Therefore if the coronavirus as it stands now or as it was a year ago is enough to need precautions for the benefit of the children, then those precautions can never be lifted. It's fair enough to argue that children's bubbles should continue if it saves the lives of adults. But if we are trying to save the lives of the children, then we will need to have "bubbles" and isolation for their entire childhoods, because coronavirus is only a tiny part of their respiratory disease danger.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445313003733 see table 1 about half way down.

I don't think anyone is arguing that one of the few saving graces of the pandemic is that children rarely die from it but they can get very ill from it and we don't fully understand long covid. There is a debate to be had about vaccinating children, although with the US going down that route it is hardly an out there idea if not done with AZ.

However the undisputed downside of the new plan is more people, adult and child, will get ill. In the overwhelming amount of cases not seriously but when your are talking 100,000 a day some will.

I see the benefits of doing it now as opposed to autumn time when virtually everyone who wanted one would be vaccinated. But can we please start acknowledging there is a downside and not hide being cliches like 'this ends now' and 'personal responsibility'.

 

[Bozza]

Just for balance, the total number of deaths of children under 15 with coronavirus, since this whole thing began, is 14. I don't know how many of those children were at clinical risk.

The average number of children who die of respiratory disease in the UK from 2001 to 2008 was 166. 38 who were not at known clinical risk, and 128 who were at clinical risk. There is no reason to suppose that this has materially changed.

The point being that for children, coronavirus is far less serious than the other respiratory diseases (like flu) that already exist. Therefore if the coronavirus as it stands now or as it was a year ago is enough to need precautions for the benefit of the children, then those precautions can never be lifted. It's fair enough to argue that children's bubbles should continue if it saves the lives of adults. But if we are trying to save the lives of the children, then we will need to have "bubbles" and isolation for their entire childhoods, because coronavirus is only a tiny part of their respiratory disease danger.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445313003733 see table 1 about half way down.

No idea why you've written that to me, I'm not passing any comment nor viewpoint on the place of children in this horrific pandemic.

As stated, I was merely pointing there is a half-way house between "unlock all the things now" and "restrictions in place forever". I'm not even advocating it's one we should be taking.

We've chosen to unleash the virus on c30m people with little/no protection. Maybe that is the right approach - I'm not saying it isn't - I'm a mere layman. It does feel risky though.