COVID-19

There seems to be a few groups born out of this.

1. There are those who see the vaccine is working and want restrictions removed now.
2. There are those who see the vaccine is working, but are happy with the cautious approach.
3. There are those who think the restrictions are being removed too quickly and predict spikes are just down the road at every stage.
4. There are those who have been scared so much by the constant messaging that they fear any news about new variants and are living at their wits end at the thought of people going to see others in a leisure setting.

This chart shown yesterday in the press conference is the one that caught my eye. There is a tiny number of people who have actually died from Covid who are in a group that are not at the current vaccine roll out. I didn't realise how low these figures were based on the number of confirmed cases.

Unfortunately for some it will take a lot of convincing they can return to normal life.



On a side note I have already booked a table for the inside of a pub next Monday.

 

Good shout @Edin Nowhere I'm just looking on the Toby Calvery information always said we'd go for a Toby breakfast as I've heard some good reports.
I believe me and our lass fall into the second caturgory and are happy with the cautious approach, see the Brit Awards are going ahead tonight with an audience of 4,000.

The BRIT Awards 2021 with Mastercard will welcome a live audience of 4,000 people at this year’s event taking place on 11th May at The O2 arena in London, and to be broadcast live on ITV and ITV Hub.

 

I lean more to No1 than No2. However it saddens me to see those screaming blue murder at any relaxation of restrictions and predicting new waves of Covid. It's as if they will be disappointed if it doesn't produce another wave.

Toby Carvery Breakfast is ok, I've always found the one's at pubs next to Premier Inns very good, and the kids eat free. If I were going to a Toby Carvery it would be for the roast, that really is fantastic.

 

Wasn't it the top man with regards Covid saying in his opinion there will be no more lockdown, I believe that's why Boris is being cautious, that's crowds at Wembley the snooker in Sheffield and tonight at the O2 they will have their fingers on the pulse getting any feed back that needs to be acted upon, I am feeling really positive about the longer term I wish I was as positive about our club .

 

To say Scotland want to be their own country they have as always just announced what they will do a day after Boris, and basically just tweaked a few things to make it look different.

Groups of Six can meet inside but only from three different households.
Alcohol can be served in pubs or restaurants until 10.30pm with again groups of six from three different households.
Eight adults from Eight different households can meet outside.
Children in secondary schools still have to wear masks.

I mean what is the point in such petty differences, I said this from the start that the whole of the UK should just be doing the same thing to keep the rules clear.

The curfew for pubs and restaurants was always a disaster as everyone ended up on the streets at the sametime. So this 10.30pm thing makes no sense and just screams of being different for the sake of being different.

Then on the 7th June the curfew will be pushed back to 11pm before moving to some sort of normal a week after England at the end of June.

Completely fecking pointless.

 

Great sales technique.

Ryan Sparks announces Valley Parade to be used as a vaccine hub.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/12/indian-covid-variant-calls-in-question-17-may-reopening-in-uk-say-experts?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

As you say, the chart shows that almost all the deaths are in groups that have now been offered the vaccine. You assume that means its fine to go back to normal, because you appear to have 100% confidence that the vaccines are going to stop the virus spread or, if not, prevent any serious illness/death amongst vaccinated people.

The 64million dollar question is whether this Indian variant evades the vaccine or mutates further into another strain that does so.
If it doesn't then there's really nothing to worry about. If it does then it could throw us back into another lockdown next autumn as deaths start to rise again.

I sincerely hope you are right and that the scientists warning against what they see as premature mixing indoors are wrong. But if they aren't then, once again, we will be shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. The difficulty is that we don't have a crystal ball.

There's absolutely no chance that Johnson will delay opening things up further on the 17th May. Let's hope the next few weeks will see the Indian variant remain just in isolated pockets and/or solid evidence emerges that the vaccine works against it.

 

These people are looking for a reason to keep locked down indefinately. People want to be on record with their projections of doom so if something goes wrong they can say I told you so. If they are wrong it is unlikely it will be heard of again.

Weren't the Brazilian and South African variants the biggest danger to us but they are hardly spoken about now. The Indian variant spreads but has not been proven to be superior to the vaccine. It's death rate is also not something that is of grave concern as it has not been proven deadlier than any other strand of Covid. It's ripping through India because the health service is overwhelmed and the total vaccinations are very low.

Sky news were talking of regional lockdowns, why? The virus will always exist, the vaccine is here to reduce the damage the virus does, not wipe it out entirely. If you're only going to feel safe with Zero Covid, then you will never feel safe.

 

1. I don't think that's true. They are giving their honest view based on their knowledge, experience and expertise. These are the same people who were saying last autumn that it was too soon to lift the autumn lockdown and that planning for a normal Christmas would cause a major second wave. They were completely correct on both counts. The government did what it always does - shut the stable door after the horse was bolted. Had they acted on the experts' advice we'd have had a shorter winter lockdown, less isolation and far fewer deaths.

2. Presumably because, a) we don't yet know enough about the Indian variant to know whether it is vaccine resistant and b) to prevent widespread transmission out of the current hotspots. The wider it transmits, the more chance of further mutations undermining the good work of the vaccine programme.

Yes, we are going to have to live with the virus. But living with the virus may mean we have to accept some localised firebreak lockdowns for some time yet, so that wider society can return to normality without causing a general resurgence.

 

There really is people out there who wany us locked up forever.

Got to give the Guardian credit though, they do manage to find the scientists who will have the most negative viewpoint possible and make it sound like its a general scientific viewpoint.

 

I see you completely skimmed over the Brazilian and South African variant which were due to swamp our country. A bit like this scientists conclusion will be completely skimmed over if another wave doesn't arrive, however if another wave does arrive it will be pushed as a told you so.

There are many theories put forward by scientists and many of them differ.

 

Can we stop this? There's very little long term evidence at all of a correlation between an early lockdown and the end of restrictions. it's confirmation bias,

In fact quite a number of countries that were originally praised as being early are the same ones who are still having restrictions.

 

100% and weirdly - if we find a scientist that is completely anti-lockdown there views are minimised and curtailed, rightly so.

If certain media outlts find a scientist that is utterly risk averse it is put out there as being "correct".

In truth there are people - including scientists - at both of the extremes but why are we focusing on those (although I think I know) when the consensus is much more balanced.

 

If they push ahead with regional lockdown I won't be following them. The rate of the virus is not of concern, it is the rate of deaths and hospitalisations.



If this doesn't clearly illustrate that the risk of death to those without the vaccine is low, and that those with the vaccine have now been brought down to the risk level of a 30 year old then by all means double mask, buy another sofa to hide behind, don't go out, stay inside but don't expect everyone to follow. Covid is around for good, we will never go Zero Covid without living as an isolated island forever.

 

did those variants not swamp the country because we had a lot of restrictions in place even if not full national lockdown

 

The rate of the virus is of concern if it leads to further mutations. The point of local lockdowns, if they happen, is as much to prevent further mutations as it is to protect people who, as you say, are either low risk due to age or have been vaccinated ( except for the refuseniks, of course).

I'm not saying we should all stay at home on our own. I agree that we have to start opening things up. But I still think that there will be pockets of various versions of Covid breaking out in specific places and I can't see why you think localised lockdowns to prevent wider spread isn't a good idea.

 

In Bradford the same areas have been full of high rates regardless of lockdown, and that localised lockdown has been opened up to all of Bradford as the council was shit scared of tackling the problem at the source. Thornton and Thornbury are about 10 miles apart, the rate in Thornbury was 100 per 100,000, where as the rate in Thornton was 10 per 100,000 last summer, Pudsey 2min down the road from Thornbury fell under Leeds.

Due to this the gym on Thornbury roundabout was open and being accessed by people in the Thornbury area because it under Leeds but in an area of a high rate, where as Thornton, 10 miles away had gyms shut because Bradford council wanted to force closures to the whole district.

That is why I think localised restrictions are bollocks.

Mutations won't happen in this country where the majority of the population are vaccinated, they will happen overseas, so unless your aim is to stop everyone from leaving and entering the country we are going to have to live with it.

 

So because Bradford Council chose not to discriminate between high and low rate areas that means all localised lockdowns are bollocks, however they are applied? Brilliant.

 

Yes, it's a fecking ridiculous position to lockdown low rate areas because they share the same council as high rate areas. If only the areas of concern were locked down then there wouldn't be an issue, locking whole areas down regardless is a reason why this doesn't work.