Forum menu
stevextc
Free Member
sc-xcEdit. You do know that ‘adopted’ doesn’t mean ‘looked after child’ don’t you?
That wasn’t my choice of term….
I’m asking WHY the blanket term “Adopted” makers a difference in COVID becase that is what tyhe government website defines as a vulnerable child.
Steve, apologies - I didn't realise that the gov used adopted as an indicator of vulnerability. Our adoptions are managed by a regional agency, and whilst we provide a level of support i would agree with you that they are no more vulnerable than any other child.
All the other indicators I would agree with though - in particular children in care.
Apologies for missing that, it will teach me to read next time!
Just been sent the below by a relatively sharp minded person, it read fairly logically to my very uneducated brain, but I know I may have missed a lot. Can anyone better placed than me give a more educated view?
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/12/30/what-is-left-to-say/
Where are we at with vaccine resistance of the South Africa variant?
it read fairly logically to my very uneducated brain
From that link...
what we are seeing at present does not differ greatly from previous years
I'll pass. Thanks.
@lunge it is a pretty reasoned debate, and one with which I have considerable sympathy. Basically not enough is known about the disease, so appeal to analysis of overall deaths and excess mortality (which I have done since April). There is one point which needs addressing, and the author falls short:
Two things stand out. First, there was an obvious ‘COVID19 spike’. Second, what we are seeing at present does not differ greatly from previous years. The normal winter spike in deaths.
What we are seeing differs greatly from previuos years. The "normal" winter spike is nothing of the sort. Why? Because in no previous winter have we had the control measures in place that we have at the moment. What the author should state is "Against a background of very high contact restriction, up to and including closing schools, shops, leisure, working from home, furlough, massive online home delivery..., we see the normal winter spike".
Consider what the "normal" spike might look like in a few weeks. Ugly is my prediction. Think about the spike with NO intervention. It is now relatively simple to spot the effect of the lockdown on cases and hospital admissions. Soon it will show on deaths.
Whilst unpalatable socially and economically, lockdowns have the desired epidemiological effect of limiting spread. A more transmissible strain appears to require greater control measures to limit that spread. It's for politicians to decide policy, but soon those decisions will be taken out of their hands.
what we are seeing at present does not differ greatly from previous years
This is what concerned me. What is wrong with what's written?
Basically, what can I push back to my mate to tell him it's rubbish (assuming it is).
Edit, thanks Tired.
Kendrick is, to be very generous to him, a 'fringe' figure who aligns himself with contrarian, sceptic causes. The content of his sum-up on Covid was predictable from the outset.
I don't understand why there aren't just extra restrictions brought in today, why wait. I hate the half arsed "there will be further restrictions" speeches that you then have to wait a week to find out what they are. We are in a constant state of wondering what to prepare for next.
What we are seeing differs greatly from previuos years. The “normal” winter spike is nothing of the sort. Why? Because in no previous winter have we had the control measures in place that we have at the moment.
Well indeed - being subject tom and abiding by the various the measures in place I haven't caught Covid.. but this year I haven't been ill with anything, at all. I almost miss being ill.
I don’t understand why there aren’t just extra restrictions brought in today, why wait.
Boris "I've called a COBRA meeting after the weekend" Johnson?
I don’t understand why there aren’t just extra restrictions brought in today, why wait.
Watched the start of the news with my 17 year old, both of us demanding to know why, of restrictions will be needed in a few weeks, why we don't bring them in now, and maybe save a few thousand lives, while furlough is running anyway....
I again find myself in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with every single word Jeremy Hunt has uttered today.
Trying to reason out when this will be "over".
So, what percentage of people need to be vaccinated before we can stop all these lockdowns/tiers? Which I guess is a definition of "over"
How would that be figured out?
And if they are aiming for 2 million doses of the vaccine per week, does that mean 2 million people per week - or do they need both doses to be considered "vaccinated", so once people start getting the second doses, you're really only looking at 1 million people per week - as folk have to go in twice.
So, if we thought 50% of people needed to be vaccinated to get back to "normal", and we're looking at a million folk a week, plus the 12 weeks wait in between doses, with 66 million people that could be ~40-45 weeks down the line...
Question(s) on that, can needles be recycled?
No (may be exception for dentists). Not sure this will be the biggest issue, the number of needles and syringes made each year is mind-boggling (vets / diabetics / cosmetic surgery etc etc).
What we are seeing differs greatly from previuos years. The “normal” winter spike is nothing of the sort. Why? Because in no previous winter have we had the control measures in place that we have at the moment. What the author should state is “Against a background of very high contact restriction, up to and including closing schools, shops, leisure, working from home, furlough, massive online home delivery…, we see the normal winter spike”.
I'm inclined to agree. This is the issue that we are dealing with, when callers like the previous few (who may or may not be trolling / sealioning as well) present these facts but leave out a critical part of it. But we've become polarized, and followers of that path will not listen to that reasonable debate.
But on that issue you also get the "I'll pass thanks" and "The content of his sum-up on Covid was predictable from the outset" comments without actually addressing why the figures do look the same, and it's easy to see why we're then accused of drinking the Kool-aid
So, what percentage of people need to be vaccinated before we can stop all these lockdowns/tiers? Which I guess is a definition of “over”
How would that be figured out?
90% of serious illness and death occurs with the groups that are prioritised by the vaccination program: People with certain pre-existing conditions, health and care workers and the over 50s. Collectively they are 25% of the population.
So vaccinating those 25% takes us 90% of the way to 'over'
I’m inclined to agree. This is the issue that we are dealing with, when callers like the previous few (who may or may not be trolling / sealioning as well) present these facts but leave out a critical part of it. But we’ve become polarized, and followers of that path will not listen to that reasonable debate.
But on that issue you also get the “I’ll pass thanks” and “The content of his sum-up on Covid was predictable from the outset” comments without actually addressing why the figures do look the same, and it’s easy to see why we’re then accused of drinking the Kool-aid
Thanks, that all makes more sense.
Your second paragraph is spot on though. I know very little on this subject, like I suspect the majority of people. You can't expect people to learn if when they ask for a view they get those kind of comments.
Transmission is typically controlled once a proportion of contacts can no longer be infected (either because they have had it, or been protected from it by vaccine) that proportion is 1 - 1/R. R for the new strain is perhaps 4, so about 75%. If we assume 25% will have had the infection by the time vaccination has brought in some control (maybe), then that fraction is about 50%. For 66M people, 33M adults vaccinated, 1M a week (I'm a little pessimistic), then I think 3Q21 is realistic.
The Guardian are reporting that Scotland could go into full lockdown tonight. If they do how long before Wales and England (in that order) do too?
why, of restrictions will be needed in a few weeks, why we don’t bring them in now
It's to float the idea, assess the reaction to any tightened restrictions and when they are announced any dissention will be muted.
So vaccinating those 25% takes us 90% of the way to ‘over’
Probably needs TiReds input rather than mine, but I'm not so optimistic - that may be 90% of the way to reducing deaths to a more "acceptable" level. But it will have to go a lot further than 25% before transmission and risk of serious illness is reduced to what I'd consider a safe number.
I'm 51. Something like 25 million in the queue before I get vaccinated apparently (was on a website, might be wrong). That's less than half the population at that point.
And remember, once my 80 year old parents have had their vaccination - well, a month after their second dose, which is 4 months after a first dose they still haven't been offered - they might be able to hug their teenage grandchildren again because the vaccine suggests they shouldn't get as seriously ill if the kids pass it on to them.
That's how I see the scale of this, and the timeline to normal.
Edit - TiRed got there first
Probably needs TiReds input rather than mine, but I’m not so optimistic – that may be 90% of the way to reducing deaths to a more “acceptable” level. But it will have to go a lot further than 25% before transmission and risk of serious illness is reduced to what I’d consider a safe number.
I was keeping it simple really - the struggle we face, the point of restrictions, is not overwhelming heath services. It hasn't been about eradicating the virus. As soon as pressure on the health service has been relieved governments have let go of the brakes as much as possible and allowing as much 'normal' as they can.
Once those 25% have protection then the pressure of services will be relieved enough that quite a lot more 'normal 'can happen, even though theres still quite a lot of work to be done.
Scotland in full lockdown now until the end of January.
Looking at my empty fridge, shopping later might be quite something...
rj
also on beeb,
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-55531069
Mostly Boris has just followed Sturgeon by about a week since getting the top job.
Sounds the same as Tier 4 in England for the most part
A week seems to be about the timescale for it to be too late as to make any difference, so Boris should be on cue for next Monday then.
Let's remind ourselves of last time eh?
https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1341340265135665152?s=20
except no churches, school from home, work from home, shielding groups don't go in at all
Still prescient...
Sounds the same as Tier 4 in England for the most part
Schools in Scotland will be home learning only until February
Our genius of a PM is still insisting schools should be open in tier 4 areas. Apart from London, obviously. The Golden City on the Hill, being an independent nation-state, has its own rules
Schools in Scotland will be home learning only until February
Yup, and infection rates in a lot of England far exceeds what we have.
Rome is burning, once more.
Yup, and infection rates in a lot of England far exceeds what we have.
Rome is burning, once more.
A very teary sister at Guy's just now wishes England would follow us in Scotland. It sounds like it's pretty desperate on the front line.....
Thanks for the info on vaccination percentages TiRed
TBH the difference in infection rates is mindboggling right now. According to the data.gov.uk page, the 7 day average to yesterday stands at:
Wales 469.4 per 100000
England 476.9
Northern Ireland 394.9
Scotland 188.3
I reckon if more Scottish people realised that, we'd have a lot more trouble with rulebreaking/new restrictions etc- Johnston'd be shouting it from the rooftops if the situation were reversed and probably telling you to get back to work.
Isn't a lot of the data quite a bit out of date now with the christmas and new year having just been?
Johnson is now booked for an 8pm announcement and parliament recalled for Wednesday. And I've found myself agreeing with Hunt (I feel dirty).
We're going into full lockdown again surely? About time too...
Johnson due at 8pm, sweepstake on how late he'll be?
Full lockdown I suspect.
Full fat lockdown from Wednesday I'd say. Think the furlough scheme will be getting used by us again. We finished 20% down on 2019. I'm really starting to fear for my job now.
Aye, full fat lockdown till end of Feb I reckon.
Likely end result is end of Feb. But they'll start with a shorter time period and then extend. This government likes to feel its way along... week by week, day by day...
stcolin... it's going to be a tough few months... but likely to end up quite a good year later on... keep your eyes up, past the winter... we can hope for better circumstances later in 2021
Yep, full lockdown from Wed until end of Jan to start with IMO.
Thankfully our school has seen sense and closed its doors from tomorrow.
sc-xc
Steve, apologies – I didn’t realise that the gov used adopted as an indicator of vulnerability. Our adoptions are managed by a regional agency, and whilst we provide a level of support i would agree with you that they are no more vulnerable than any other child.
All the other indicators I would agree with though – in particular children in care.
Apologies for missing that, it will teach me to read next time!
No need for you to apologise ... my actual point is that these things should actually be clear and relevant.
A bit of an aside for Covid but realising there are different adoptions but regardless I have to then think something is wrong if the agency is supporting an adoption that makes the child vulnerable.
But on the Covid track again ... this gross emotive hijacking shouldn't be affecting people's right to life. There are always those who believe the stuff they get told to believe .. not maliciously but due to a distorted personal experience.
I've got my own (distorted) personal experience as well and by a load of those criteria I and most of my friends growing up would be classed as "at risk". We were poor, didn't have permanent accommodation, my mum was in and out of hospital. The one thing that was most challenging and is common across that group was/is food... something that this government have made it very clear they wish to restrict to children going into schools. I find this perverse... to hold food up as a bribe to take a health risk for the family.
We hear this drone narrative of "what about the vulnerable children" as if every parent (obviously excepting those who are teachers or social workers) gets home and potentially beats their children within an inch of their lives.
We hear how the children will be scarred for life by missing a single day of school....
At the best of times this narrative is stupid and IMHO harmful... now we still have the "if your child misses a day their entire life will be wrecked", mixed with some expectation that parents are abusing their children .. claims of it affecting their mental health whilst not even acknowledging that being responsible for their grandparents death is hardly beneficial AND it's killing people and being used to deny food to kids that are in need.
We could "discuss" the rest of that list ... but that isn't the point.
(For example if a child is a carer then it shouldn't be a simple matter of them being "expected" if the person they care for is at high risk from Covid)
The real point is the misleading information playing to a narrative across the most unlikely of bedfellows.
On one hand people who actually care about kids but perhaps subscribe to extreme views...and on the other people who really don't give a monkeys about anyone who's education doesn't involve private schools. (Or in the case of Boris someone who thought it perfectly acceptable to infect his unborn child)
Yup, my money is on 'proper' lockdown as and remote learning (for kids). The govt will go on and on about how English 'exams will still be happening'... Then shelve them 20 minutes after the Scots do.
TBH the difference in infection rates is mindboggling right now.
That's one thing but relatively minor when you consider the growth rate and how big the differences will be in a week.
Half term ends 22nd Feb for my kids so guess that's likely to be the earliest timepoint for reversal of lockdown.