COVID Vaccine !

[Milkfloat]

That made me laugh. I'm not sure if you have in mind protecting the UK or protecting the rest of the world.

We currently have not far off the highest prevalence in the world and are likely to get there soon with our current growth rate, though of course that assumes equal case ascertainment with is admittedly very unlikely. Nevertheless, alongside a highly vaccinated population this is literally a perfect way to generate new vaccine resistant variants.

Both, but mainly external threats. Although we have a high number of cases, if you add up all the cases in the rest of the world, plus factor in huge under reporting in the majority of countries you will see that the chances of a variant externally dwarf the chances internally. Closed borders will not stop a variant, mainly because borders are never truly closed, but they will buy you time. Still laughing?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Still laughing?

Yeah, it is pretty funny to focus on stopping people coming in when we will be exposing more vaccinated people to COVID than the rest of the world combined (I think this will be true - the high prevalence plus high vaccination is unique).

Our policy right now is literally to maximise this risk as far as possible. It's quite something.

 

[winjim]

But no view on how this could or should be handled, just that someone you don't like isn't doing it properly. That leaves you all the space in the world to constantly have a go at what is being planned, without ever having to take any of the responsibility for anything. I think that puts you in the same place as some of the selfish people.

You want to carry on with severe lock down restrictions, masks, restrictions to numbers, everyone working at home etc because that suits you. The people who it doesn't suit, actors, people who work in public spaces and people who thrive being around people can all just do what? Lose their jobs, go slightly mad from being alone all the time, as long as you are safe and things are done to suit you then all is well?

**Not aimed at @winjim ** Why do people find it so hard to come up with a plan that they would implement, yet carp on endlessly about the plan has had been put in place. Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough. They are brave enough to be abusive to the people who do have that job though.

I'm already taking a Master's degree in clinical biochemistry, I feel like also taking one in epidemiology and public health might be a bit much of an ask.

 

[winjim]

But no view on how this could or should be handled, just that someone you don't like isn't doing it properly. That leaves you all the space in the world to constantly have a go at what is being planned, without ever having to take any of the responsibility for anything. I think that puts you in the same place as some of the selfish people.

You want to carry on with severe lock down restrictions, masks, restrictions to numbers, everyone working at home etc because that suits you. The people who it doesn't suit, actors, people who work in public spaces and people who thrive being around people can all just do what? Lose their jobs, go slightly mad from being alone all the time, as long as you are safe and things are done to suit you then all is well?

**Not aimed at @winjim ** Why do people find it so hard to come up with a plan that they would implement, yet carp on endlessly about the plan has had been put in place. Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough. They are brave enough to be abusive to the people who do have that job though.

I'm already taking a Master's degree in clinical biochemistry, I feel like also taking one in epidemiology and public health might be a bit much of an ask.


We're veering well away from the thread topic which is vaccination.

 

[Milkfloat]

Yeah, it is pretty funny to focus on stopping people coming in when we will be exposing more vaccinated people to COVID than the rest of the world combined (I think this will be true - the high prevalence plus high vaccination is unique).

Our policy right now is literally to maximise this risk as far as possible. It's quite something.

You need to look at your numbers again, they are way off. In addition, so far all the variants that can be traced, occurred first in unvaccinated immunocompromised people. These are the very people who had the vaccine first. Finally, the chances of the vaccines having no effect on a variant is very slim, by design and luck coronavirus vaccines are very likely to cover all variants to a greater or lesser degree. Coronavirus is not like flu.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Finally, the chances of the vaccines having no effect on a variant is very slim, by design and luck coronavirus vaccines are very likely to cover all variants to a greater or lesser degree.

Uh, you're the person suggesting border policy was critical to protect against this risk, not me. You're now arguing it doesn't need to be protected against...

 

[mjr]

There seems to be a chorus of voices of people who perceive themselves as extremely vulnerable who are against easing restrictions and seem to yearn for Zero Covid.

"seems" is doing a lot of work there. And while anyone sane might yearn for zero covid, most know it won't happen soon. People are against brainlessly lifting all restrictions, not merely easing a few.

I know it is easier to argue against things nobody said, but it does not help move the discussion along. Why not try discussing the real views posted here?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

seem to yearn for Zero Covid.

I don't think it's zero Covid, it's a manageable risk of Covid.

Right now, we're firmly on track for a higher prevalence than at any point during the entire pandemic. And yet we are deliberately choosing not merely to "live with" that projected level, but to further boost it.

Imagine how that feels if you're immune suppressed with a hospital appt to get to...

 

[mjr]

**Not aimed at @winjim ** Why do people find it so hard to come up with a plan that they would implement, yet carp on endlessly about the plan has had been put in place. Most contributors are happy to look back and complain about what has happened, but no-one will look forward, I guess because they realise just how impossible it is to predict something when you don't know what is around the corner and they simply aren't brave enough. They are brave enough to be abusive to the people who do have that job though.

I have posted plans occasionally in the past, generally of the form of allowing various things when R is below such-and-such. You and shep notably ignore it and accuse me of wanting to keep businesses closed and other things I did not, plus complain that no-one posts what we would do, so what would be the point of spending time developing it again now?

Also, calling what amounts to "fark it, we surrender to covid" a plan is being very kind.

 

[PK99]

"seems" is doing a lot of work there. And while anyone sane might yearn for zero covid, most know it won't happen soon. People are against brainlessly lifting all restrictions, not merely easing a few.

I know it is easier to argue against things nobody said, but it does not help move the discussion along. Why not try discussing the real views posted here?

This is a well informed and argued summary pf the current position

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57678942

 

[fossyant]

Sort of steering it back on subject. Recent catch up with my line manager and he has seen a number of acquaintances (with kids in school) who've tested positive, one 30 year old ended in hospital.

It's looking like responsibility will be sitting with employers as well. We're a Uni, so come September we will still have many student's not yet fully vaccinated, and you can still spread it. We think we will still have social distancing in place, and working will still be a hybrid.

If you test 'positive' I'm assuming you've got to be off work, even if fully vaccinated. I know the isolation stops for 'contacts' for those double jabbed, but not if you test positive.

There is going to be a lot of lost work hours hence it still makes sense to WFH if in a close office environment. What happens if the whole office test positive, no-one is ill, but all have to stay off for 10 days. We will still be testing staff and students.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

I have posted plans occasionally in the past, generally of the form of allowing various things when R is below such-and-such.

That is the problem, you say we should do this and that when R is below...

What we need to do though is figure out how we get R below (shall we say 1 for sake of the argument here?) . It is no good saying when we get a car we will go for a drive, but never buying a car is it?

So, what is your plan to get R below the notional figure of 1 (lets not get bogged down on the number)?

 

[Craig the cyclist]

I'm already taking a Master's degree in clinical biochemistry, I feel like also taking one in epidemiology and public health might be a bit much of an ask.

You are telling us very definitely then that you are not qualified to come up with a simple plan, but you are qualified enough to tell us the one that the experts have come up with isn't good enough, won't work and is basically going to kill us all?

 

[winjim]

You are telling us very definitely then that you are not qualified to come up with a simple plan, but you are qualified enough to tell us the one that the experts have come up with isn't good enough, won't work and is basically going to kill us all?

I'm telling you we're off topic.

 

[mjr]

That is the problem, you say we should do this and that when R is below...

That's called being data-driven. I know that is unpopular with supporters of this shower.

What we need to do though is figure out how we get R below (shall we say 1 for sake of the argument here?) . It is no good saying when we get a car we will go for a drive, but never buying a car is it?

So, what is your plan to get R below the notional figure of 1 (lets not get bogged down on the number)?

I do actually say that I will buy an electric car when my current one fails, the range is more than X and the price is less than Y (but there are many other scenarios possible, too). That seems rational to me. The current government so-called plan for covid seems more like just going out and ordering a shiny top-end Tesla with no thought of whether they've got the cash or can afford the repayments - or rather, they think they've got enough support that they can afford the population to pay for it with their lives.

Part of my plan to reduce R would be not allowing high-risk activities when R is high, such as unmasked indoor hospitality, part of it would be encouraging low-risk alternatives such as waiving rates and charges on roofed outdoor terraces or putting more money into decent cycling and walking commuting/shopping routes to get people out of enclosed bus/tram and polluting cars, and - back on topic! - part of it would be vaccinating everyone who can be. We are so close to that, it is summer where outdoors living is easier (warmer even when wet!), yet they seem determined to spaff this luck up the wall.