Forum menu
So my folks are pretty pissed off. They are due their 2nd (Pfizer) jab next Wednesday, unless they are not.
I'd be interested to hear something outside of the other noise about it.
I get it on one level -
do 1m wk1, 2m wk2, 3m wk3, the first 1m wk4, 2m wk5, 3m wk6...
or... 1m wk1, 2m wk2, 3m wk3, 4m wk4, 5m wk5, 6m wk6...
- it's literally doubling the coverage.
But... that's not what it was sold as to those that took it. I think i'd be a bit pissed off if the rules of the game changed that much while i was in the middle of playing it.
'Noises off' sound like here in Staffs they are going to proceed with the 2nd doses @ 3 weeks, and so on for those already on the chain, but it's yet to be confirmed. I'll be updated on Monday.
Was talking about the vmic one in Oxfordshire, the one that Boris and various other drones like having photos taken in front of.
Am out of gmp now so don't follow the different manufactring sites anymore.
Not surprised that lots more facilities are being built
That's my wife's testing team all vaccinated now (well, 1st dose anyway), only anecdotal evidence, but the folks who have had covid all seem to have had a reaction to the vaccination, all say it's like a very similar day or two afterwards with same feeling as when they were unwell with the virus.
Nothing bad, but interesting all the same. That's them just getting home lateral flow tests too, test themselves twice a week.
graham 1980 - has it.
My neighbour's scientist sister was brought out of early retirement in the summer, as part of a team to help oversee the production in Oxford of this new vaccine. It's a very long drawn out procedure, because standards are so high. These things can't just be thrown up overnight.
Experts are being brought in and everything is being done to the letter.
Edit- Meant to say she is part of the team that are overseeing 'building the facility' to produce the Ox/AZ vaccine
But… that’s not what it was sold as to those that took it.
This is my ethical issue. Informed consent is based on information available. Sometimes that changes with new information or toxicology findings. But this decision is not based on information. If the UK conducted a trial I would be satisfied. But this is no-evidence based medicine.
And I’ve done analyses to try and get drugs approved for different regimens to those tested. I’ve sat across the table and argued with the FDA and EMA why this should be possible. Before Phase 3, I’ve been successful from time to time. But then we’ve tested that reasoning. That’s what I’d do this time.
This is my ethical issue. Informed consent is based on information available. Sometimes that changes with new information or toxicology findings. But this decision is not based on information. If the UK conducted a trial I would be satisfied. But this is no-evidence based medicine.
+1000. And is a gift to anti-vax propagandists who are looking to exploit perceived weaknesses in the testing/approval/licensing process.
I see Boris is doubling down on Marr. Get back to school. Very little risk to children. Which isn't the point. If it is more transmissible between younger children, and delivers a higher viral load, younger parents will in turn be more likely to become seriously ill. We shall see if the anecdotal reports of increasing numbers of 40-50s hospitalised back this up. The Christmas delivery of infected grandparents should be arriving imminently, too.
The question of whether schools should close or not is interesting. The benefits of closing them need to be weighed against the sheer number of people blatantly ignoring the tier 4 rules in our area.
My youngest son is in secondary school where a lot of restrictions have been in place, with use of bubbles, social distancing, mask etc and he’s had minimal interruption to his education since September. Over the past 2 weeks, I’ve been out walking every day, and seen countless large groups out and about and not keeping a safe distance. Yes, I know it’s safer outdoors but we’re still trying to understand how transmissible the new variant is. Being out in a group of 10 when there’s not a breath of wind and no one’s keeping their distance could be as risky as being in a controlled environment in a school.
Being out in a group of 10 when there’s not a breath of wind and no one’s keeping their distance could be as risky as being in a controlled environment in a school.
‘could be’ = is not
People should not be mixing… but a small group outside is not the same transmission risk as 30+ in one room for a long period of time.
30+ in one room for a long period of time.
+maskless in a school environment. Plus this kind of shit every now and again, regardless of the best intentions and efforts of school leaders.
Looked after kids are much more likely to under achieve at school and so schools are prioritising there education.
Can you explain the science behind this for adoption?
Why are we lumping together broad categories not treating people as people?
Lets say little Johhny lives in a single parent family as he father died before he was born and is living with his surviving parent plus a partner but isn't adopted but little Jane's who's parent also dies before she's born surviving parent meets someone and she gets adopted. (It could equally be Janes' parents adopted her at birth after failed IVF or are gay or any other reason)
The EXACT Q I'm asking is why Jane is "expected" at school, first day of term and Johnny isn't. These two PEOPLE as individuals not as numbers.
Before killing people I'd want to see some irrefutable evidence that the act of adoption itself has a negative effect on achievement at school.
Looked after kids are much more likely to under achieve at school
Are you suggesting neglected children do better at school? How are you measuring "better"
I assume you don't actually mean that literally and it's vague or "special use" language?
Again, this doesn't make any sense, it's a pure blanket statement that takes no account of Johnny or Jane and their families. It's all types of wrong in general ... if they really do underachieve in school (which seems unlikely on a individual level) then school may be the wrong place for them?
But that aside ... we are in the middle (or somewhere very bad) in a pandemic that is killing PEOPLE and spreading at an increasing rate.
And that is the point PEOPLE are dying.
You/I/We can either treat these PEOPLE as numbers or as people.
Despite whatever averages you choose Janes' parents have the same right to life as Johnny's
Even assuming you personally don't care what happens to Janes parents because for some reason you disagree with adoption (perhaps due to inheritance?) then how do you justify the effect on Jane of loosing a parent or parents as less important than Johnny?
@kelvin
Ok then, ‘could be’ = ‘is not’ but my point is that the benefit of closing schools is not going to outweigh the detriment if so many people are ignoring the rules anyway.
I know that sitting indoors for several hours is riskier than being out, but I stand by my point that a group of 10 hanging around for hours together, shouting and not keeping any distance when there isn’t a breath of wind isn’t exactly sensible.
Looked after kids are much more likely to under achieve at school and so schools are prioritising there education.
Can you explain the science behind this for adoption?
Is not science its statistics.
Even assuming you personally don’t care what happens to Janes parents
I'm done responding to your rubbish you are sick little excuse for a human being who also appears to lack a basic grasp on reality, you keep throwing insults like a child hiding behind a computer screen, I bet you are a snivviling little runt in real life who lacks the stones to back your opinion.
I've gone from nazi, to killer to uncaring about the effects of the pandemic on peoples lives, all this and (luckily for you) we have never met.
vickypea
The question of whether schools should close or not is interesting. The benefits of closing them need to be weighed against the sheer number of people blatantly ignoring the tier 4 rules in our area.
Taking that ALONE at face value ... one drives the other.
If your kid is in school then little or nothing else you do within reason will make a REAL difference.
Yes, I know it’s safer outdoors but we’re still trying to understand how transmissible the new variant is. Being out in a group of 10 when there’s not a breath of wind and no one’s keeping their distance could be as risky as being in a controlled environment in a school.
We can't say for certain but it's pretty unlikely.
We can't visit gran now anyway but if we could the acid test for me would be how safe or not I felt that to be.
My perspective (note my and my mothers) is that careful outdoors activities such as riding a bike are orders of magnitude lower than sitting in a classroom.
I might be wrong ...that's just my best guess.
If he goes back Wednesday then we will also go on rides until he is told to self isolate again.
It's a bit more complicated in reality as "in school" is a binary case. Either complete self isolation or in school.
Perhaps PHE are simply using school as a way to control a large number and put them into forced isolation ? I can see how that would be beneficial but if they are they aren't sharing this and people's behaviours will reflect what they are told.
the benefit of closing schools is not going to outweigh the detriment if so many people are ignoring the rules anyway
Unfortunately, there is greater need to keep classmates apart, and away from staff, if community transmission is made worse by people ignoring rules.
I see the Xmas truce is over
stevextc, I work in children's social services. You seem quite confused, I have read your post a few times, and despite the bold bits, I have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps go and learn what defines a child in care (looked after child in increasingly old money) then consider why you think that a child that has moved Foster placements 6 times in 2 years - which means starting new schools, dealing with new Foster siblings etc etc...may need more support.
I honestly don't think you know what you're talking about.
Edit. You do know that 'adopted' doesn't mean 'looked after child' don't you?
@stevextc
So what is the basis for the rule that you should only meet outdoors with one other person? Why does Tier 4 not allow the “rule of 6” outdoors? Is that based on scientific advice or something random that the government have made up? I’m interested to know.
And it’s pretty obvious that I’m not comparing “going on a bike ride” with sitting in a classroom of 25 kids. I am talking about big groups from multiple households standing around together, shouting and laughing while not keeping a distance, in the current weather conditions of cold, still air.
So why not clamp down on the community rather than schools?
So why not clamp down on the community rather than schools?
Schools are much easier to police, lots of people in one place!!! I guess thats why they want us testing the kids too.
What people seem to forget is that not everybody is furloughed or working from home. My wife and I are both 'key workers' and have had to go out to work as normal since March. Our local authority grade key workers by their job description/industry and only allow children from NHS to attend school.
What this means is that my 80 year old parents have to look after (and teach) our children when my wife and my shifts coincide.
In our situation we are puting my parents in real danger as we have no other alternative (our friends wont help as they say if school is shut, they wont take our kids for the day).
It is easy to say 'keep the schools shut' if you don't have children, they are teenagers or you are furloughed/working from home. For many others, this is a really bad idea - there are NO childcare options currently available to us.
To make matters worse, every time I go out for a cycle or walk, I see many groups of cyclists and walkers not socially distancing/giving a **** about the rules and New Year around here seemed to be fair game for people to mix...
But yeah, keep the schools shut and screw over the working families who can't stay home.
Well, I don’t agree that teachers should have to shoulder the responsibility of testing pupils.
It’s a very difficult situation and I can totally see how the virus can be easily transmitted in schools but the general public are getting sick of restrictions and are now ignoring them. Right when we have a new variant that is considerably more transmissible.
So why not clamp down on the community rather than schools?
Go on… how do you propose stopping people meeting up outdoors? As it happens, around here, we’ve only seen very small groups… and normally this place is packed with large groups of walkers and bikers. It’s really not a big enough issue to start getting all police heavy about, is it? I realise it may be very different where you are.
As an aside… I would hope that if fewer kids were physically in the classroom, as per the spring “lock down”, parents and the wider public would realise just how bad things have got, and do more to stop the spread. Perhaps I’m an optimist.
“If schools are safe, so is my office… group walk…” etc. Take stronger measures in schools… after the government have made it clear that they are last places they want to “close” and hopefully people will get a better feeling for just how bad this winter could get if we don’t act to reduce transmission.
I see Boris is still insisting on schools opening?
That's pretty much a guaranteed u turn for sure isn't it? I just can't see how it's even remotely viable with this new strain running through the population.
AA
Is not science its statistics.
Jane and her parents aren't statistics to me they are people.
That is the fundamental disconnect.
You seem to think that I think you are a bad person or something when what I am trying to do is avoid people being misled by statistics and question them and the science (and blindly following orders).
Ultimately this comes back to judging people vs statistics.
Let me TRY and put that in a different context...
Let's say I am looking for van insurance (This is actually true)... and I fill in the questions.
When I get to "Do you have any children under 18 living at home" the next question is "are any of these children adopted"
Now they may or may not have statistics ... but regardless I think that question is out of order and they should NOT be collecting those statistics.
Part II - following orders ...
So whoever wrote that question was following an order and not questioning it or did and got told "write the questions or find another job".
you are sick little excuse for a human being who also appears to lack a basic grasp on reality, you keep throwing insults like a child hiding behind a computer screen, I bet you are a snivviling little runt in real life who lacks the stones to back your opinion.
Pot and kettle?
The thing is I don't mind really.
It's an emotive subject especially for those who have lost loved ones, businesses or livelyhood.
That pretty much makes it crap for everyone!
In the bigger picture if you are swallowing statistics whole that doesn't make you a bad person indeed my actual opinion is you are someone who's heart is in the right place.
However, I'm not the sort of person that is happy to just have "the statistics say so" witho9ut questioning the statistics and what they actually mean.
But yeah, keep the schools shut and screw over the working families who can’t stay home.
Or keep schools open with a new variant that spreads much more easily amongst young people and leave those who work without any form of social distancing in schools to become ill and potentially die.
Schools will be open. How many pupils will be on site, and sharing a room, will have to change. This should have been addressed from September. It can’t be ignored any longer. Parents are not immune. Teaching staff are not immune. Other school staff are not immune.
I see Boris is still insisting on schools opening?
That’s pretty much a guaranteed u turn for sure isn’t it? I just can’t see how it’s even remotely viable with this new strain running through the population.
When you are accelerating down a hill and you aren’t sure if the brakes are strong enough to slow you down the first thing any rational person would do is hit the brakes as hard as possible. You can always take your foot off the pedal a bit but you can’t go back in time and retrospectively apply them.
Unfortunately we have a bunch of clowns in charge so don’t expect a rational response.
Sobering stuff.
I see the Xmas truce is over
Yep, either that or he's finished the mince pies and port.
Can you explain the science behind this for adoption?
Why are we lumping together broad categories not treating people as people?
Yet again you are leaping to incorrect conclusions from a too literal reading of information. Being adopted by a step parent is totally different to being adopted by completely an unconnected person(s). It doesn't (usually) involve social services, for one thing.
I understand the problems of your childhood have left you with a deep distrust of authority, but it seems to be really damaging your perspective of how things are actually handled nowadays.
When you are accelerating down a hill and you aren’t sure if the brakes are strong enough to slow you down the first thing any rational person would do is hit the brakes as hard as possible. You can always take your foot off the pedal a bit but you can’t go back in time and retrospectively apply them.
Especially when you've seen your brakes fail a couple of times already
AA obvious answer is to vaccinate all school staff as a priority (assuming it is safe for the individuals), they are nearly as frontline as the NHS. But no we are vaccinating people who can and should be isolating, short termism and populism runs riot again.
It does amaze me that we are not vaccinating all front line staff, nurses, police, teachers etc.
I agree that care homes and their staff need it too, but then surely those who are most likely to come into contact should get it
Exactly this. Vaccinate ALL key workers / people who HAVE to leave their house, not just NHS staff. My wife and I don't get to socially distance at work but we have to be there. No ifs, no buts, but we wont be vaccinated until the same time as others in my age group (who work from home).
Bonkers.
My son is in the final year of his medical degree and did a 4-week placement on a Covid ward just before Christmas. No vaccination and not even a single test!
It does amaze me that we are not vaccinating all front line staff, nurses, police, teachers etc.
Bus drivers, train guards… the list goes on. Vaccination is building towards a more open society later this year… NOT NOW. It will take months for vaccinations to make a real difference, we should be treating this winter stage of the pandemic for what it is… a bigger risk to life and quality of life for many than the spring stage was.
Tradesmen should be vaccinated as well. Mr Pea is a plumbing and heating engineer and has to go into private houses every day fixing leaks and broken boilers. It’s bonkers that people in those jobs aren’t a priority for receiving the vaccine.
It all takes time. Sort out care homes and NHS staff first, everyone else needs to reduce contacts and take as many precautions as they can, for now.
Let me TRY and put that in a different context…
Let’s say I am looking for van insurance (This is actually true)… and I fill in the questions.
When I get to “Do you have any children under 18 living at home” the next question is “are any of these children adopted”Now they may or may not have statistics … but regardless I think that question is out of order and they should NOT be collecting those statistics.
Eh?
Again, the children classified as vulnerable or 'looked after' are not adopted. Your example above is entirely irrelevant.
I work with the statistics you refer to, and - like it or not - the children that sit behind each of those numbers. I can guarantee that if you are a child in care, your educational attainment is poorer. And, I can tell you (in my Borough) the reasons why each of the 900+ children experience this more difficult start to life.
I feel like you are deliberately misreading this situation, or are looking for a position on something you simply don't understand, either way it's offensive.
Problem is with "essential workers" and vaccine priority, where do you draw the line?
My postal delivery depot has ~125 staff in it during the course of each morning and there are frequent times where you simply cannot always stay >1m from colleagues. Some staff deliver to the same ~600+ homes and shops each day, while others deliver different duties each day/week.
At least now deliveries include some test kits, some real essential postal parcels, but by and large it has been record amounts of "essential online shopping tat," which has then sometimes taken priority over delivering letters because there simply is far too great a daily workload.
Schools are much easier to police,
Until they’re let out. Where my daughter goes to, they have staggered exits and starts, but they congregate round the only entrance/exit waiting for friends/ siblings. This is right next to a public footpath/bridleway so there is plenty of passing traffic.
A fair number come by bus and mix with other schools in town whilst waiting.
“Fortunately” it’s just a 2 minute walk home for her but she has to push through the scrum.
We probably caught our Covid via her.
It does amaze me that we are not vaccinating all front line staff, nurses, police, teachers etc.
I agree that care homes and their staff need it too, but then surely those who are most likely to come into contact should get it
They've clearly grouped it to prioritise those people most at risk of serious illness or death. Looks pretty logical to me - including why front line NHS and care workers need it now. I suspect prioritising inside groups depending on job role would be a logistical nightmare and a political hot potato.
Well, our local authority has declared primary schools will have all kids and staff in tomorrow. So it’s down to parents and teachers to work our what the next move is. I predict near full attendance for a few weeks, followed by a longer spell of limited onsite attendance than would otherwise have been the case (be that via “closures” or just responding to new cases).